“Sad day for the UK”: The linking of debates about settling refugee children in the UK with Brexit on an anti‐immigrant news website

Goodman, Simon; Narang, A.S.

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2579

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(93 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, anti‐refugee arguments were still possible, as the findings demonstrate. For example, Goodman and Narang () showed how support for child refugees was undermined by the ongoing suggestion that they were really adults posing as children. In addition, they showed that in the UK, the refugee crisis was used to justify voting to leave the European Union.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the UK

Goodman

Kirkwood

2019

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the UK in the context of the “refugee crisis”. A discursive psychological approach is presented as the best way to understand what talk about the concept is used to accomplish in these debates. A large corpus of political discussions (13 hours of debate featuring 146 politicians) and 960 newspaper articles from the UK were discourse analysed. The analysis identified five dilemmas about integration: Integration is positive and necessary, but challenging; Host communities are presented as welcoming, but there are limits to their capacity; Refugees are responsible for integration, but host communities need to provide support; Good refugees integrate, bad ones don't; Refugees are vulnerable and are skilled. All are used to warrant the inclusion or exclusion of refugees. The responsibility of western nations to support refugees is therefore contingent on the refugees behaving in specific ways.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…How the European Union (EU) should respond to the crisis has been controversial and has itself been considered a crisis for the Union. The UK's decision to leave the EU has been shown to be influenced by the refugee crisis and general opposition to migration (Goodman & Narang, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the UK

Goodman

Kirkwood

2019

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the anti-refugee side, populist parties argue that society is in decline and that limiting immigration is necessary to protect it. For example, Donald Trump and Brexit supporters both argued that immigration should be restricted in order to restore society (Edwards, 2018;Goodman & Narang, 2019). On the pro-refugee side, critiques of (neoliberal) contemporary society are accompanied by calls for equality and provision for those in need, including refugees (Boersma et al, 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling Societal Discontent and Intergroup Threat: Explaining Actions Towards Refugees and Towards the State

Gootjes¹,

Kuppens²,

Postmes³

et al. 2021

rips

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In debates about migration in Western countries, citizens' concerns about immigrant groups often go hand in hand with concerns about the decline of society as a whole. Societal discontent, however, is a distinct concept and may have its own relations with immigration attitudes, over and above the role of perceived immigrant threat. In a survey of a representative sample of Dutch people (N = 1239), we disentangled societal discontent from intergroup threat with respect to their relationship with different kinds of action intentions regarding refugees (both pro and anti) and intentions regarding the government. Unsurprisingly, societal discontent predicted support for anti-government protest (which was strikingly high). More importantly, societal discontent independently predicted both pro-refugee and anti-refugee action intentions, over and above intergroup threat. These associations were moderated by intergroup threat: only when refugees were experienced as a threat did discontent predict anti-refugee action intentions. On the other hand, societal discontent predicted more pro-refugee action intentions, but only when people experienced refugees as an enrichment. Thus, despite populist rhetoric, societal discontent is not always tied to anti-immigrant actions. This suggests that refugee sentiments and societal discontent are not exchangeable: societal discontent plays an important role in reactions to immigration.

show abstract

“…In one image, a bearded dark‐skinned man is depicted with a bubble saying ‘I’m only seventeen’ (Appendix S1: Image 8), resonating with the storyteller’s line: ‘Disregarding resources and safety, the leaders welcomed a flood of people, including those who never really needed asylum’ (01:39–01:49). The text is a sarcastic intertextual clue referring to the anti‐immigrant debate about the age of asylum seekers implying that some adult refugees are pretending to be children (Goodman & Narang, 2019). Moreover, differentiating between ‘real’ and ‘false’ refugees allows criticism of immigration while maintaining a reasonable and sympathetic approach to ‘genuine’ asylum seekers (Lynn & Lea, 2003; Sakki & Pettersson, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilizing collective hatred through humour: Affective–discursive production and reception of populist rhetoric

Sakki

Martikainen

2020

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examines the mobilization of populist rhetoric of the 2019 Finns Party election video. By focusing on both the FP's election video (production) and Youtube users' comments (reception), we examine the constructions and uses of social categories and humour as well as responses to their rhetorical deployment among like-minded supporters and opponents. The multimodal analysis of the production of a populist campaign video demonstrates the construction of social categories and humour through the five steps of collective hate. These humorous messages are differently received by like-minded and opposing YouTube users. Two supportive affective-discursive practices glorification and schadenfreudeboth express shared joy and laughter, but while glorification emphasizes the positive self-understanding of the in-group, schadenfreude belittles the 'political Other'. Two opposing affective-discursive practicesirritation and scornplace FP voters in subject positions of morally and intellectually inferior fascists, racists, and idiots. The populist message fosters expressions of social anger and polarization between FP supporters and opponents. Humour entangled with hatred encourages a sense of moral superiority in both groups. This study contributes to the current knowledge of mobilizing populist rhetoric and polarization, and responds to the call to broaden analysis of political communication in the field of multimodality. Recently, populism has been central to public and academic debate. Political and socialscientific discussion of its definitions have been lively: it has been defined as an ideology (Mudde, 2004), discourse (Laclau, 2005), and rhetorical style (Jagers & Walgrave, 2007), and a combination of these (see e.g. Rooduijn, 2019). Social psychology has approached populism as an intergroup differentiation based on its vertical and horizontal dimensions (Staerkl e & Green, 2018). While its vertical differentiation refers to the gap between 'good people' and a 'bad elite', its horizontal dimension concerns the confrontation between 'in-' and 'out-groups', the latter often referring to refugees, characterized as 'the dangerous Other' (Brubaker, 2020; Wodak, 2015). From this model, it follows that a combination of high-level vertical and horizontal differentiation best describes national (right-wing) populism, whereas a combination of high-level vertical and low-level horizontal differentiation best describes social (left-wing) populism. Previous studies suggest that This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

“Sad day for the UK”: The linking of debates about settling refugee children in the UK with Brexit on an anti‐immigrant news website

Cited by 16 publications

References 36 publications

Political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the UK

Political and media discourses about integrating refugees in the UK

Disentangling Societal Discontent and Intergroup Threat: Explaining Actions Towards Refugees and Towards the State

Mobilizing collective hatred through humour: Affective–discursive production and reception of populist rhetoric

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About