Strangers ante portas : The framing of refugees and migrants in the Czech quality press

Abstract

This article examines how the two most popular Czech quality dailies framed refugees and migrants during the European refugee crisis in 2015. It explores the extent to which the framing described by previous studies carried out in Western and/or destination countries can also be identified in the newspapers of a country that has had only minimal experience with migration. Instead of identifying frames beforehand and coding them as holistic variables, a routinely used approach to frame analysis, it employs a more reliable and transparent method of hierarchical cluster analysis. The dailies framed the refugees and migrants mainly as a burden on host society, as victims of a humanitarian crisis and, to a lesser degree, as a security threat. The results show that the frames used by the Czech dailies closely correspond to those described in previous research, despite the different methods of analysis and the different geographical and cultural settings.

Keywords

Content analysis Czech broadsheet newspapers framing hierarchical cluster analysis media coverage refugee crisis refugees and migrants

Introduction

News stories are considered to be key sources of knowledge and perceptions of refugees and migrants (Burroughs, 2015). They play an important role in generating public support and can drive the development process for asylum and migration policy (Thorbjornsrud, 2015; Threadgold, 2009; Van Gorp, 2005). Also, media stories feed back into policy discourse and provide the symbolic conditions under which audiences are invited to evaluate the issues (Chouliaraki and Zaborowski, 2017). The media coverage of refugees and migrants has therefore attracted steady attention from media scholars, which further intensified in the aftermath of what was labelled by some media and politicians as a European refugee crisis in 2015. In particular, as framing plays an important role in the formation of public attitudes on the issues, their causes and the appropriate solutions, a plethora of studies have explored how the media framed refugees and migrants (Berry et al., 2016; Chouliaraki and Stolic, 2017; Eberl et al., 2018; Greussing and Boomgaarden, 2017).

Despite the depth and richness of the existing research, at least two blind spots persist. First, as suggested by Eberl et al. (2018) in their recent systematic literature review, previous studies are mostly concerned with the media framing of migration in Western and/or destination states, specifically in countries with a high number of recent or continual asylum applications, in particular the United Kingdom, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium and France. However, the media framing of refugees and migrants in non-Western countries (e.g. Eastern European countries) and/or countries with limited experience of incoming migration is an understudied issue (see Eberl et al., 2018: 216). Yet, the universal validity of the media framing of refugees and migrants should not be automatically assumed.

To fill the gap in the existing research, this article investigates how the two leading Czech daily broadsheet newspapers, Právo and MF Dnes, framed the peak of the so-called European refugee crisis in the second half of 2015. The Czech Republic is an example of a new EU member state with very limited current or past experience with migration. In 2015, when the crisis culminated, there were only 117 asylum applicants per 1 million inhabitants, considerably less than the EU average of 2470 (Eurostat, 2016). Even though there were almost no refugees and migrants, more than 80% of Czechs had negative feelings towards them, which was one of the three highest shares within the EU (European Commission, 2015).¹

The second drawback of prior research is methodological. Previous studies identified the frames beforehand, either based on a literature review or by qualitative analysis, and then coded them in a quantitative content analysis as holistic variables. Such approaches raise doubts about validity and reliability, as well as comparability. To avoid this, we do not rely on a manual holistic method of identifying the media frames, but instead, drawing on Matthes and Kohring (2008), we adopt a more inductive approach. We conceptualise frames as clusters of frame elements, use manual content analysis to code these elements and then use hierarchical cluster analysis to identify their configurations (the frames).

The contribution of this article is threefold. First, it explores whether the frames described by previous studies carried out in Western and/or destination countries can also be identified in the Czech daily newspapers, and thus tests their relevance in a different geographical and cultural setting. Second, unlike the previous studies that relied on a manual holistic approach to analyse the media framing of refugees and migrants, this article uses – for the first time within this topic, to the best of our knowledge – a more reliable and transparent method of hierarchical cluster analysis, which contributes to the validation of the frames identified in previous studies. And, third, it provides a better understanding of how refugees and migrants were framed in a Eurosceptic and migrant-fearing country.

The results show that the two leading Czech newspapers framed the refugees and migrants mainly as a burden on the state and the EU institutions, and less often as victims of a humanitarian crisis and a security threat. These frames correspond to those described in prior research focussed on Western and/or host countries. This finding supports the validity of the previously identified frames, suggests their more universal relevance and indicates that media coverage of migration across various countries follows similar patterns.

Literature review

The media framing of refugees, migrants and migration identified in prior research is considerably diverse. This is hardly surprising given that the studies analysed the media coverage in different countries, media outlets and time periods, and used different methods to identify the frames. Even though this limits any attempts to draw comparisons or generalise conclusions, we can still distinguish a few recurrent patterns.

With a great deal of simplification, it can be said that framing migration as a problem or burden on host societies, including economic consequences, prevails (Benson and Wood, 2015; Corbu et al., 2017; Kovář, 2019; McKay et al., 2011; Tkaczyk, 2017; Van Gorp, 2005; Vliegenthart and Roggeband, 2007).

Another frequently identified frame is security frame. It emphasises the threats and security risks related to migration (Figenschou and Thorbjornsrud, 2015; Greussing and Boomgaarden, 2017; Horsti, 2007; Vliegenthart and Roggeband, 2007). The frame portrays refugees and migrants as intruders (Van Gorp, 2005) and depicts security measures and policies as adequate solutions to handle migration.

The humanitarian frame depicts refugees and migrants as victims. Such news stories show the suffering and desperate situation of individuals on the run, report on humanitarian aid and eventually provide insights into their motivation and background. The authors refer to this frame as the humanitarian/humanitarianism frame (Greussing and Boomgaarden, 2017; McKay et al., 2011), the victim/victimisation frame (Figenschou and Thorbjornsrud, 2015; Van Gorp, 2005; Vliegenthart and Roggeband, 2007) or moral responsibility/solidarity frame (Triandafyllidou, 2018).

Another frequently employed frame depicts migration as an illegal activity or in relation to crime, and refugees and migrants as both perpetuators and victims (e.g. of human smuggling). Some scholars label such frame as the illegality frame (Horsti, 2007; McKay et al., 2011) and others use the concept of criminalization or criminality (Breen et al., 2006; Brouwer et al., 2017; Greussing and Boomgaarden, 2017).

Previous research suggests that prevalence of frames is related to spatial proximity of refugees and migrants (Branton and Dunaway, 2009; Kim et al., 2011). For instance, problem- and security-oriented frames in news stories on migration are more common in host countries when compared with countries with low numbers of refugees and migrants (Benson and Wood, 2015; Figenschou and Thorbjornsrud, 2015). Also, security frame seems to be associated with specific groups of migrants: Roma people or migrants from Eastern Europe are usually depicted as an economic threat; North Africans and Arabs are more often portrayed as cultural or security threats (Balch and Balabanova, 2016; Meeusen and Jacobs, 2017).

The diversity of frames identified in previous studies may be also caused by the methodological pluralism of approaches to frame analysis. Some studies used the manual holistic approach: they first generated frames, either based on literature (e.g. Kovář, 2019) or qualitative analysis (e.g. Vliegenthart and Roggeband, 2007), and then coded them as holistic variables in a manual content analysis. In both cases, the holistic approach significantly decreases the reliability of the coding (see Matthes and Kohring, 2008).

Rather than directly coding the whole frame, other scholars identified several frame elements and then grouped them according to their own discretion (Benson and Wood, 2015; Figenschou and Thorbjornsrud, 2015; Van Gorp, 2005). This may raise concerns about arbitrariness. To avoid this, some researchers applied a computer-assisted approach to frame analysis, sometimes combined with a linguistic approach (Brouwer et al., 2017; Lawlor and Tolley, 2017). These studies identified the frames either on the basis of emerging word clusters (Greussing and Boomgaarden, 2017) or specific linguistic relations between words (Blinder and Allen, 2016). The strength of computer-assisted studies lies in their higher transparency and reliability. On the other hand, some scholars argue that lexical patterns are not a sufficient indication for the framing of a news story (Blinder and Allen, 2016), and that software lacks cultural competence that may be needed to interpret a frame (Hertog and McLeod, 2001).

In general, the approaches to frame analysis used in prior research raise concerns about validity and reliability, because the extraction of frames may differ across researchers and coders. In most cases, frames are defined subjectively, and to some extent, arbitrary. Eventually, frames are adopted from previous studies, which limits the possibility to detect emerging frames in the media content. Finally, the computer-assisted approaches limit frames to keywords in context and syntactical patterns (see Matthes and Kohring, 2008). In this study, we, therefore, adopt an approach that allows us to avoid these drawbacks.

Method

The purpose of this article is to examine how selected Czech broadsheet newspapers framed refugees and migrants during the initial stage and the peak of the European refugee crisis in the second half of 2015, explore the salience and prominence of the particular frames and compare these frames with those identified in previous studies.

To avoid pitfalls identified in already mentioned approaches to frame analysis, we draw on Matthes and Kohring (2008), and conceptualise frames as clusters of frame elements. These authors follow Entman’s (1993) definition of frames and distinguish four main groups of frame elements: problem definition (actors and central issues), causal attribution, moral evaluation and treatment recommendation. We established individual content analytical variables both deductively (from prior studies) and inductively (in pre-research), to detect variables not identified in previous research. Next, we coded these variables in a manual content analysis. Finally, the variables were grouped together by hierarchical cluster analysis (Matthes and Kohring, 2008: 264).

Comparing with previous studies, this approach is more transparent in how the frames are extracted from the text, more sensitive to the analysed media content and should yield more reliable and valid results (Matthes and Kohring, 2008: 274–275). Even though the frame elements are identified a priori by the researchers, their particular configuration in a frame is established by transparent and systematic method of cluster analysis, unlike in the previous studies that identified whole frames beforehand and coded them as single variables.

We analysed the news articles published in the two Czech most-read daily broadsheet newspapers, centre-left-leaning Právo and centre-right-leaning MF Dnes. The analysis is guided by the following research questions:

RQ1. How did the two Czech dailies frame refugees and migrants during the so-called European refugee crisis, and what was the salience and prominence of the frames?

RQ2. To what extent do the frames correspond with the representation patterns identified by previous research of the media coverage of migration?

Broadsheets with different political orientations were chosen, since we were interested in both centre-left and centre-right mainstream media framing of refugees and migrants. MF Dnes, after the tabloid Blesk, is the second most-read nationwide daily (with an average daily circulation 155.542 in 2015 – Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2016). It belongs to the publishing company Mafra, which is owned by a trust whose beneficiary is Andrej Babiš, previously the minister of finance (2014–2017) and present-day prime minister of the Czech Republic, who is known for rejecting the relocation quotas and reception of refugees in general. Právo, the third most-read nationwide daily (average day circulation 89.560 in 2015 – Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2016), belongs to publishing company Borgis, which is owned by the paper’s editor-in-chief, Zdeněk Porybný. It is believed to be ideologically close to the Czech Social Democratic Party, which in 2015 was in a government coalition with ANO (the party led by Andrej Babiš).

We content analysed news stories published from 25 June to 30 October 2015, that is, the initial stage and the peak of the refugee agenda (based on our analysis, the media attention dropped significantly in November). The news stories were collected from the Anopress database.² Relevant news stories were identified by the occurrence of the keywords ‘migration’, ‘refugee’, ‘crisis’ or a combination of them in the full text of the articles. All the news stories that focussed on the refugee crisis as their main topic were included in the analysis. Visual images were retrieved from the library archive.

To ensure the reliability of the coding, a team of four coders was trained, and intercoder reliability was assessed on a subsample of 83 out of the 531 analysed news stories (i.e. 16%). As a reliability measure, we used Krippendorff’s (2004) alpha coefficient. Since the alpha is sensitive to skewed variables (i.e. variables with values that are rarely present in the sample), in the case of such variables, we additionally used an average pairwise percent agreement. Scores were computed with Recal web tools (Freelon, 2010, 2013). Based on Krippendorff’s (2004) recommendation, only the variables with a reliability measure higher than 0.667 or an average agreement higher than 70% for dummy variables with a rare occurrence of a value of 1 were included in the analysis. The majority of variables achieved reliability scores higher than 0.800 or 80%.

The codebook included: (a) specific frame elements: problem definition, causal attribution, moral evaluation and treatment recommendation; the frame elements as well as the corresponding variables (all coded as binary ‘dummy’ variables) are described in the Supplemental Appendix and (b) variables related to editorial choices, more precisely the dominant location of the news stories (national or international) and issue prominence: the placement of article (page number), its length (number of columns) and presence of an accompanying photograph (these indicators of prominence were used, e.g. by Granner et al., 2010; McCombs, 2005; Pollock et al., 2017).

In the subsequent step, analogically to the approach taken by Matthes and Kohring (2008), hierarchical cluster analysis (Ward method, squared Euclidean distance) was used to determine the main frames. Hierarchical cluster analysis is a statistical classification technique in which articles are grouped into clusters such that the articles in a cluster are very similar to one another and very different from the articles in other clusters. Only variables with frequencies higher than 5% were included in the cluster analysis because the variables with very low frequencies do not significantly contribute to the forming of clusters and do not help in their differentiation.

Results

The hierarchical cluster analysis of 32 frame elements enabled us to identify three main clusters. The three-cluster solution was found to be superior in terms of both interpretability and clarity. The mean values of all of the variables for each of the clusters are depicted in Table 1

Table 1.

Mean values and standard deviations for three identified frames.

Variables	Burden on the state and EU institution frame (N = 259), M (SD)	Humanitarian frame (N = 177),M (SD)	Security threat frame (N = 95), M (SD)	Total (N = 531), M (SD)
Problem definition: topic
Security risks and threats	0.73 (0.45)	0.06 (0.23)	0.77 (0.42)	0.51 (0.50)
Illegality	0.62 (0.49)	0.12 (0.33)	0.22 (0.42)	0.38 (0.49)
Tragedies, humanitarian problems, unfortunate fate of individuals	0.37 (0.49)	0.42 (0.50)	0.16 (0.37)	0.35 (0.48)
Protests, demonstrations, polarisation of society, unrest	0.19 (0.39)	0.12 (0.33)	0.38 (0.49)	0.20 (0.40)
Political agenda, public administration agenda	0.88 (0.33)	0.80 (0.40)	0.68 (0.47)	0.82 (0.39)
Problem definition: source
Politicians or their spokespersons	0.70 (0.46)	0.63 (0.49)	0.52 (0.50)	0.64 (0.48)
Security forces	0.28 (0.45)	0.12 (0.33)	0.31 (0.46)	0.23 (0.42)
Officials, public servants	0.18 (0.38)	0.12 (0.32)	0.15 (0.36)	0.15 (0.36)
Other media or journalists	0.20 (0.40)	0.09 (0.29)	0.05 (0.22)	0.14 (0.34)
Refugees, migrants	0.09 (0.29)	0.11 (0.32)	0.15 (0.36)	0.11 (0.31)
NGOs, volunteers	0.11 (0.31)	0.10 (0.30)	0.04 (0.20)	0.09 (0.29)
Vox pop	0.08 (0.28)	0.03 (0.17)	0.20 (0.40)	0.09 (0.28)
Experts	0.06 (0.24)	0.06 (0.23)	0.09 (0.29)	0.07 (0.29)
Causal attribution
Violation of the territorial integrity	0.86 (0.34)	0.06 (0.24)	0.28 (0.45)	0.49 (0.50)
Indefinite danger	0.55 (0.50)	0.16 (0.37)	0.72 (0.45)	0.45 (0.50)
Economic burden	0.13 (0.34)	0.14 (0.34)	0.16 (0.37)	0.14 (0.35)
Increase in terrorist threat	0.11 (0.31)	0.03 (0.17)	0.21 (0.41)	0.10 (0.30)
Threats to cultural values	0.05 (0.23)	0.02 (0.13)	0.33 (0.47)	0.09 (0.29)
Threats to national sovereignty (vs EU)	0.13 (0.34)	0.05 (0.22)	0.07 (0.26)	0.09 (0.29)
Moral evaluation
Refugees and migrants as burden	0.70 (0.46)	0.58 (0.50)	0.52 (0.50)	0.63 (0.48)
Refugees and migrants as disruptive element	0.81 (0.39)	0.12 (0.33)	0.49 (0.50)	0.53 (0.50)
Refugees and migrants as victims in need of help	0.53 (0.50)	0.54 (0.50)	0.22 (0.42)	0.48 (0.50)
Refugees and migrants as security threat	0.50 (0.50)	0.07 (0.26)	0.85 (0.36)	0.42 (0.49)
Refugees and migrants as culturally different	0.06 (0.24)	0.04 (0.20)	0.37 (0.49)	0.11 (0.31)
Treatment recommendation
Activities of security forces aimed at territorial protection	0.88 (0.33)	0.13 (0.34)	0.33 (0.47)	0.53 (0.50)
Detention of refugees and migrants	0.37 (0.48)	0.24 (0.43)	0.51 (0.50)	0.35 (0.48)
Quotas and relocations	0.31 (0.47)	0.28 (0.45)	0.07 (0.26)	0.26 (0.44)
Immediate help to refugees and migrants	0.21 (0.41)	0.30 (0.46)	0.05 (0.22)	0.21 (0.41)
Measures against human smugglers	0.24 (0.43)	0.02 (0.15)	0.01 (0.10)	0.13 (0.33)
Changes in asylum policy	0.13 (0.33)	0.13 (0.34)	0.06 (0.25)	0.12 (0.32)
Use of force/coercive means against refugees and migrants	0.14 (0.35)	0.02 (0.13)	0.09 (0.29)	0.09 (0.29)
Military intervention in the Middle East	0.08 (0.27)	0.05 (0.21)	0.03 (0.18)	0.06 (0.24)

NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation.

. The interpretation of the frames, in line with Matthes and Kohring (2008), is based on the variables with the highest means, the variables with the lowest means and the variables with significantly different means across the clusters.

The first and the most represented frame identified in 49% of articles could be named as a burden frame. This frame portrayed refugees and migrants mostly as a problem to be solved by the state and the EU institutions and as intruders. It thematically described the migration to Europe as a part of a political and public administration agenda, with security and illegality as the other main related problems. Typically, politicians (or their spokespersons) and, to a smaller extent, security forces, were the main sources invited to comment on the issues. Regarding the causal attribution, as a consequence of the refugee crisis, the violation of the territorial integrity was of particular concern. Refugees and migrants were depicted mostly as disruptive elements and burdens on the state, and less often as victims needing help. Unlike the other two frames, this frame markedly focussed on the potential solutions for the crisis, with particular attention paid to the activities of law-enforcement agencies, especially those concerned with the territorial protection of the state. Other frequently mentioned solutions were detentions, quotas, relocations and measures against human smugglers. In summary, the first frame adopted a practical and technocratic perspective on the refugee crisis. Refugees and migrants were framed as disruptive elements whose mobility must be brought under control, which is a challenge to be solved by politicians and public administration.

The second most represented frame (identified in 33% of the articles) depicted migration to Europe as a humanitarian crisis that should be solved by the state and the EU institutions. Refugees and migrants were portrayed as victims who deserve help. In accordance with the former frame, it thematically described the refugee crisis mostly as an issue for the political and public administration agenda, and it also illustrated the crisis via the unfortunate fate of individuals, tragic personal stories and humanitarian problems. Again, mostly politicians were invited to speak about these issues, complemented (to a significantly lower degree) by the refugees and migrants themselves, as well as representatives of NGOs and volunteers. Refugees and migrants were shown as victims in need of help that is supposed to be organised by the state authorities or the EU institutions (thus, in this sense, they were also depicted as a burden). This frame prioritised immediate help to the refugees and migrants, including integration programmes, as the desired solution of the crisis.

The last and the least represented frame (18% of the articles) depicted refugees and migrants as a security threat that should be taken care of by politicians and public administration, ideally via their isolation and incarceration. In comparison with the previous two frames, it paid more attention to public unrests and the polarisation of society caused by the division over how best to deal with migration. Again, mainly politicians were given voice in the news stories, although less than in the articles using the other two frames. On the other hand, security forces, vox pop and, surprisingly, also the refugees and migrants themselves were more often present as sources. Regarding causal attribution, the migration flow was shown as an indefinite danger, and, unlike in the previous two frames, also as a threat to cultural values and a terrorist threat. The proposed solutions were clear: detention of refugees and migrants and the deployment of law-enforcement agencies for the territorial protection of the state.

It can be noted that the three identified frames partially overlap. More precisely, the dominant frame depicting refugees and migrants as a burden also contains some elements present in the security and humanitarian frames; however, it clearly differs in the higher attention shown towards treatment recommendation.

Rather surprisingly, regardless of the diverging political stances of the analysed dailies, there were no major differences in their framing of refugees and migrants. Also, taken together, the selected Czech newspapers followed the patterns of representation previously identified in the Western media coverage of refugees and migrants. The three frames established by hierarchical cluster analysis – refugees and migrants as a burden on the state/EU institutions, as victims of a humanitarian crisis and as a security threat – are in fact similar to the frames described in earlier research (e.g. Don and Lee, 2014; Khosravinik, 2009; McKay et al., 2011; Pugh, 2004; Rasinger, 2010; Threadgold, 2009; Van Gorp, 2005).

Issue salience, the central focus in the research on agenda-setting (McCombs, 2005), is usually measured not only by the mere number of articles (as the main indicator of media attention), but also by their prominence (Kiousis, 2004). Table 2

Table 2.

Use of frames by prominence.

	Page placement M (SD)	Article length (no. of columns) M (SD))	Inclusion of a photography % (N)
Burden on the state and EU institutions frame	6.4 (5.5)	11.2 (4.9)	59 (153)
Humanitarian frame	6.9 (4.8)	8.5 (5.4)	37 (65)
Security threat frame	5.5 (4.6)	10.1 (5.3)	53 (50)
Total	6.4 (5.1)	10.1 (5.3)	50 (268)

shows that the articles that framed refugees and migrants as victims of a humanitarian crisis were in all three aspects under scrutiny less prominent than the articles adopting the burden and security threat frames. They were published on later pages deeper in the issues (i.e. more distant from the prominent front page)³, they were shorter and they were less often accompanied by photographs (37% vs 59%, resp. 53%; χ² = 22.34, df = 2, p < .0001).

To further explore the relationship between the use of frames and the three indicators of prominence, coefficients of association were used. The association between the use of frames and their placement was very weak (Eta = .07), unlike the association with article length (Eta = .234) and photography inclusion (Cramer’s V = .205, p < .0001).

To compare the placement and the length of the articles using the burden frame, the humanitarian frame and the security frame, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were conducted. The differences in the page placement did not prove to be statistically significant; however, there was a statistically significant difference in the length of the articles based on the adopted framing (F (2, 528) = 15.28, p < .0001). Post hoc comparisons using the Bonferroni test indicated that the articles that framed refugees and migrants as victims of a humanitarian crisis (measured in number of columns; M = 8.5, SD = 5.4) were statistically significantly shorter than the articles framing them as a burden on the state/EU institutions (M = 11.2, SD = 4.9) or a security threat (M = 10.1, SD = 5.3). Taken together, these results suggest that articles that used the humanitarian frame were given less prominence than the ones that adopted the burden or security frames.

Besides prominence, the second aspect of editorial choices under examination was the geographical location of the news stories. Articles dealing with the refugee crisis could have reported on the events located in the Czech Republic or in the other countries. As seen in Table 3

Table 3.

Use of frames by geographical perspective.

	Czech Republic	Other country/EU	Total
Burden on the state and EU institutions frame	99 (39%)	156 (61%)	255 (100%)
Humanitarian frame	63 (37%)	107 (63%)	170 (100%)
Security threat frame	57 (63%)	33 (37%)	90 (100%)
Total	219 (43%)	296 (57%)	515 (100%)

, while the majority of the articles that framed refugees and migrants as a burden on the state/EU institutions or as victims of a humanitarian crisis used an international perspective (61%, resp. 63%), the majority (63%) of articles that adopted security framing used a domestic perspective (χ² = 19.45, df = 2, p < .0001). The coefficient of association indicates a rather weak, but statistically significant, relationship between the variables (Cramer’s V = .194, p < .0001). These results suggest that when refugees and migrants come closer to our homes, in the media coverage, they tend to change from victims or burden to a security threat.

Discussion and conclusion

This study examined how the two leading Czech broadsheet newspapers, centre-left-leaning Právo and centre-right-leaning MF Dnes, framed stories about refugees and migrants during the so-called European refugee crisis in 2015. Two main conclusions resulted.

First, irrespective of their political orientation, the analysed dailies framed refugees and migrants mainly as a burden on the state and the EU institutions, and less often as victims of a humanitarian crisis and a security threat. This is in line with previous research from various countries where framing migration as a problem or burden prevails (Benson and Wood, 2015; Horsti, 2007; Kovář, 2019; McKay et al., 2011; Tkaczyk, 2017; Van Gorp, 2005; Vliegenthart and Roggeband, 2007).

However, the mere frequency of the frames does not tell the whole story. Once we take into consideration the prominence of the frames, a slightly different picture arises, as the articles that adopted the humanitarian frame were given significantly less importance. Besides, the humanitarian frame was used mostly in the articles that described events in other countries, not in the Czech Republic. This indicates that, when refugees and migrants are far enough away, there is space for compassion in the media coverage, but when they are closer, the media increasingly treats them as strangers ante portas who are threatening those inside the city walls (Bauman, 2016).

The fact that refugees and migrants were mostly portrayed as a burden on the state, despite their physical absence in the Czech Republic, could be explained by various reasons at the social, political and media levels.

Starting with the broader social factors, the media reflect (and shape) public mood, which has been largely negative towards migration. Back in 2015, more than two-thirds of the Czech citizens thought that persons of other nationalities coming to the Czech Republic posed a problem (CVVM, 2015). These results are not surprising considering that, due to its communist past and several decades of sealed borders, the Czech Republic is an ethnically homogeneous country with limited experience with migration from countries, other than those that are culturally proximate (e.g. Slovakia and Ukraine). Thus, unlike many Western countries, the Czech Republic lacks a positive experience with migration as a stimulus for economic growth.

Moreover, public confidence in Czech politicians and public institutions is rather low (e.g. OECD, 2013). Consequently, citizens may have very little trust in the capabilities and competencies of public officials to handle a sudden migration influx and its effects (unlike, e.g. Wir schaffen das attitude in Germany). Also, the Czech Republic belongs among the most Eurosceptic countries within the EU (e.g. Eurobarometer, 2019), and the negative attitude towards migration could have been partly fuelled by the general aversion to the EU’s actions, with the proposed migration quota as the most prominent example.

These societal moods and attitudes were further reinforced by politicians who used the agenda of migration to gain political points. They acted as the protectors of the safety and security against the threats posed by migrations, and as guardians of the Czech national interests against the EU (Strapáčová and Hloušek, 2018).

Political parallelism, as a feature of the Czech media system, could have been another reason. Právo is ideologically close to the Czech Social Democratic Party, the main coalition party back in 2015, which nominated, among others, the minister of interior, who was a loud critic of quotas and migration. MF Dnes is owned by a trust whose beneficiary is Andrej Babiš, the leader of the then-junior coalition party ANO, who is known as a firm rejector of relocation quota systems and the reception of refugees. It is, therefore, not surprising that none of the dailies went against the dominant position of the leading politicians of these two parties.

Besides political parallelism, the congruence of the framing present in political and media agenda could be explained by the financial and time constraints of the newsrooms, which lead to excessive reliance on political sources and to the consequent adoption of their agenda and framing. Also, when providing news about foreign policy, national security and other high-stakes events, mainstream media tends to reflect more on the perspectives of the most powerful actors, in this case politicians (Lawrence, 2010: 266–68).

The considerable salience of the frames depicting refugees and migrants as a burden on the state and as a security threat may have serious policy implications. Preoccupation with policy solutions, crisis management and illegality and security may all contribute to the legitimisation of restrictive migration policies (Burroughs, 2015; Kaya, 2012; Pugh, 2004) and to the adiaphorisation of migration, which means that refugees and migrants are exempted from the realm of compassion and moral responsibility (Bauman, 2016).

Moving to the second main finding, the three frames identified in the Czech dailies correspond to those described in previous research even though we used a different method of analysis. While the earlier studies relied on arbitrarily identified frames established before the actual content analysis and coded them as holistic variables, this article adopted a more inductive approach and used a more reliable and transparent method of establishing the frames as particular configurations of frame elements by cluster analysis, as proposed by Matthes and Kohring (2008). The downside of this approach is that it allows to identify only one frame per article which in practice leads to their partial overlap. Nevertheless, it was possible to distinguish three main frames which turned out to be very similar to those described in the literature.

Framing refugees and migrants as a burden on the state, as well as victims of a humanitarian crisis, was found in Belgian (Van Gorp, 2005), Australian (McKay et al., 2011), British (Khosravinik, 2009; Threadgold, 2009) and Malaysian (Don and Lee, 2014) media. Representations of migration as a security threat was found in Austrian (Greussing and Boomgaarden, 2017), Australian (Pugh, 2004), British (Rasinger, 2010) and Dutch media (Brouwer et al., 2017). This supports the validity of the frames identified by the existing scholarship. It must be also noted that the adoption of frames previously identified in foreign media has been observed in other Eastern European countries, for example, Bulgaria, as well (see Balabanova and Balch, 2010).

The congruence between the frames identified in the Czech daily newspapers with opposing political orientation and those described in previous research could be explained by at least three reasons. First, it may be a consequence of the general lack of resources and the restrained financial situation of the newsrooms. Both dailies cover foreign news primarily by processing and compiling information from English-language media rather than by travelling abroad and gathering inputs on their own. It is, therefore, possible that they adopt not only the facts, but also the frames used by foreign media.

Second, it may be a consequence of a more general tendency towards internalisation, Europeanisation, Westernisation and globalisation as previously observed in the media in post-communist countries (Jakubowicz and Sükösd, 2008). Also, in principle, Czech journalists do not significantly differ from their Western counterparts in their professional values and attitudes (Urbániková and Volek, 2018), and the similarities among media producers could partially translate into similarities in the media content.

Third, the correspondence may be a consequence of the specific nature of the agenda under scrutiny. As suggested by Eberl et al. (2018), the actual repertoire of the frames used in migration coverage is rather limited. Migration may be a deeper, overarching issue that triggers universal responses balancing between compassion, distrust and fear that are fairly homogeneous across host countries, transit countries and the countries that are not affected by this phenomenon. The question, of course, is the ratio and intensity of these responses which could be influenced by various historical, cultural, social, political and media factors, some of which were mentioned above when explaining the dominance of the burden frame in the Czech dailies. However, this hypothesis should be subjected to further investigation because, with regard to the non-affected countries, it stems from the analysis of only one case.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-ejc-10.1177_0267323120928224 - Supplemental material for Strangers ante portas: The framing of refugees and migrants in the Czech quality press

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-ejc-10.1177_0267323120928224 for Strangers ante portas: The framing of refugees and migrants in the Czech quality press by Marína Urbániková and Michał Tkaczyk in European Journal of Communication

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: Michał Tkaczyk received financial support by the Grant Agency of Masaryk University under grant no. MUNI/A/1157/2019.

ORCID iDs

Marína Urbániková

Michał Tkaczyk

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Notes

References

Audit Bureau of Circulations (2016) Daily newspapers circulation. Available at: http://www.abccr.cz/overovana-data/periodicky-tisk (accessed 2 July 2018).

Balabanova

Balch

(2010) Sending and receiving: The ethical framing of intra-EU migration in the European press’. European Journal of Communication 25(4): 382–397.

Balch

Balabanova

(2016) Ethics, politics and migration: Public debates on the free movement of Romanians and Bulgarians in the UK, 2006–2013’. Politics 36(1): 19–35.

Bauman

(2016) Strangers at Our Door. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

Benson

Wood

(2015) Who says what or nothing at all? Speakers, frames, and frameless quotes in unauthorized immigration news in the United States, Norway, and France. American Behavioral Scientist 59(7): 802–821.

Berry

Garcia-Blanco

Moore

(2016) Press Coverage of the Refugee and Migrant Crisis in the EU: A Content Analysis of Five European Countries. Geneva: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Blinder

Allen

(2016) Constructing immigrants: Portrayals of migrant groups in British national newspapers. International Migration Review 50(1): 3–40.

Branton

Dunaway

(2009) Spatial proximity to the U.S.-Mexico border and newspaper coverage of immigration issues. Political Research Quarterly 62(2): 289–302.

Breen

Haynes

Devereux

(2006) Fear, framing and foreigners: The othering of immigrants in the Irish print media. International Journal of Critical Psychology 16: 100–121.

10.

Brouwer

Van der Woude

Van der Leun

(2017) Framing migration and the process of crimmigration: A systematic analysis of the media representation of unauthorized immigrants in the Netherlands. European Journal of Criminology 14(1): 100–119.

11.

Burroughs

(2015) Discursive representations of ‘illegal immigration’ in the Irish newsprint media: The domination and multiple facets of the ‘control’ argumentation. Discourse & Society 26(2): 165–183.

12.

Chouliaraki

Stolic

(2017) Rethinking media responsibility in the refugee ‘crisis’: A visual typology of European news. Media, Culture and Society 39(8): 1162–1177.

13.

Chouliaraki

Zaborowski

(2017) Voice and community in the 2015 refugee crisis: A content analysis of news coverage in eight European countries. International Communication Gazette 79(6–7): 613–635.

14.

Corbu

Buturoiu

Durach

(2017) Framing the refugee crisis in online media: A Romanian perspective. Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations 19(2): 5–18.

15.

CVVM (2015) Postoje české veřejnosti k cizinc ům [Attitudes of the Czech public towards the foreigners]. Available at: https://cvvm.soc.cas.cz/media/com_form2content/documents/c2/a1866/f9/ov150303b.pdf (accessed 2 July 2018).

16.

Don

Lee

(2014) Representing immigrants as illegals, threats and victims in Malaysia: Elite voices in the media. Discourse & Society 25(6): 687–705.

17.

Eberl

J-M

Meltzer

Heidenreich

et al. (2018) The European media discourse on immigration and its effects: A literature review. Annals of the International Communication Association 42(3): 207–223.

18.

Entman RM (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4): 51–58.

19.

Eurobarometer (2019) Closer to the citizens, closer to the ballot (Eurobarometer Survey 91.1 of the European Parliament, A Public Opinion Monitoring Study). Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your-service/files/be-heard/eurobarometer/2019/closer-to-the-citizens-closer-to-the-ballot/report/en-eurobarometer-2019.pdf (accessed 2 July 2018).

20.

European Commission (2015) Standard Eurobarometer 83, Spring 2015 – Standard Eurobarometer 84, Autumn 2015. Brussels: TNS Opinion & Social.

21.

Eurostat (2016) Record Number of Over 1.2 Million First Time Asylum Seekers Registered In 2015 – Syrians, Afghans and Iraqis: Top Citizenships. Brussels: European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/7203832/3-04032016-AP-EN.pdf/790eba01-381c-4163-bcd2-a54959b99ed6 (accessed 2 July 2018).

22.

Figenschou

Thorbjornsrud

(2015) Faces of an invisible population: Human interest framing of irregular immigration news in the United States, France, and Norway’. American Behavioral Scientist 59(7): 783–801.

23.

Freelon

(2010) ReCal: Intercoder reliability calculation as a web service. International Journal of Internet Science 5(1): 20–33.

24.

Freelon

(2013) ReCal OIR: Ordinal, interval, and ratio intercoder reliability as a web service. International Journal of Internet Science 8(1): 10–16.

25.

Granner

Sharpe

Burroughs

et al. (2010) Newspaper content analysis in evaluation of a community-based participatory project to increase physical activity. Health Education Research 25(4): 656–667.

26.

Greussing

Boomgaarden

(2017) Shifting the refugee narrative? An automated frame analysis of Europe’s 2015 refugee crisis. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 43(11): 1749–1774.

27.

Hertog

McLeod

(2001) A multiperspectival approach to framing analysis: A field guide. In: Reese

Gandy

Grant

(eds) Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 141–162.

28.

Horsti

(2007) Asylum seekers in the news: Frames of illegality and control. Observatorio (OBS*) 1(1): 145–161.

29.

Jakubowicz

Sükösd

(eds) (2008) Finding the Right Place on the Map: Central and Eastern European Media Change in a Global Perspective. Bristol: Intellect Books.

30.

Kaya

(2012) Backlash of multiculturalist and republicanist policies of integration in the age of securitization. Philosophy and Social Criticism 38(4–5): 399–411.

31.

Khosravinik

(2009) The representation of refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants in British newspapers during the Balkan conflict (1999) and the British general election (2005). Discourse & Society 20(4): 477–498.

32.

Kim

Carvalho

Davis

et al. (2011) The view of the border: News framing of the definition, causes, and solutions to illegal immigration. Mass Communication and Society 14(3): 292–314.

33.

Kiousis

(2004) Explicating media salience: A factor analysis of New York Times issue coverage during the 2000 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Communication 54: 71–87.

34.

Kovář

(2019) A security threat or an economic consequence? An analysis of the news framing of the European Union’s refugee crisis. International Communication Gazette. Epub ahead of print 28 February.

35.

Krippendorff

(2004) Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research 30(3): 411–433.

36.

Lawlor

Tolley

(2017) Deciding who’s legitimate: News media framing of immigrants and refugees. International Journal of Communication 11: 967–991.

37.

Lawrence

(2010) Researching political news framing: Established ground and new horizons. In: Kuypers

D’Angelo

(eds) Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 265–85.

38.

McCombs

(2005) A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies 6(4): 543–557.

39.

McKay

Thomas

Blood

(2011) ‘Any one of these boat people could be a terrorist for all we know!’ Media representations and public perceptions of ‘boat people’ arrivals in Australia. Journalism 12(5): 607–626.

40.

Matthes

Kohring

(2008) The content analysis of media frames: Toward improving reliability and validity. Journal of Communication 58(2): 258–279.

41.

Meeusen

Jacobs

(2017) Television news content of minority groups as an intergroup context indicator of differences between target-specific prejudices. Mass Communication and Society 20(2): 213–240.

42.

OECD (2013) Government at a Glance 2013: Trust in Government, Policy Effectiveness and the Governance Agenda. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/gov_glance-2013-6-en.pdf?expires=1585067488&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=17E1959FC67AB62F4C49D2D6457226D3 (accessed 2 July 2018).

43.

Pollock

Peitz

Watson

et al. (2017) Comparing cross-national coverage of genetically modified organisms: A community structure approach. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 94(2): 571–596.

44.

Pugh

(2004) Drowning not waving: Boat people and humanitarianism at sea. Journal of Refugee Studies 17(1): 50–69.

45.

Rasinger

(2010) ‘Lithuanian migrants send crime rocketing’: Representation of ‘new’ migrants in regional print media. Media, Culture and Society 32(6): 1021–1030.

46.

Strapáčová

Hloušek

(2018) Anti-Islamism without Moslems: Cognitive frames of Czech antimigrant politics. Journal of Nationalism, Memory & Language Politics 12(1): 1–30.

47.

Thorbjornsrud

(2015) Framing irregular immigration in Western media. American Behavioral Scientist 59(7): 771–782.

48.

Threadgold

(2009) The Media and Migration in the United Kingdom, 1999 to 2009. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.

49.

Tkaczyk

(2017) Between politicization and securitization: Coverage of the European migration crisis in Czech online news media. Communication Today 8(2): 90–111.

50.

Triandafyllidou

(2018) A ‘refugee crisis’ unfolding: ‘Real’ events and their interpretation in media and political debates. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies 16(1–2): 198–216.

51.

Urbániková

Volek

(2018) The professional identity of Czech journalists in an international perspective. International Communication Gazette 80(5): 452–475.

52.

Van Gorp

(2005) Where is the frame? Victims and intruders in the Belgian press coverage of the asylum issue. European Journal of Communication 20(4): 484–507.

53.

Vliegenthart

Roggeband

(2007) Framing immigration and integration: Relationships between press and parliament in the Netherlands. International Communication Gazette 69(3): 295–319.