Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2023
Risk Narratives on Immigration During the COVID-19 Crisis in Italy: A Comparative Analysis of Facebook Posts Published by Politicians and by News media
This work explores how the narrative on immigration changes when society is threatened by “real” risks, i.e., during the COVID-19 health crisis. We compared the frequency and engagement of over 348,684 posts published on Facebook between December 2019 and November 2020 by Italian politicians and news media. We identified two waves of “tangible crisis” assuming that in these two periods the risk stemming from COVID-19 was strongly perceived by the Italian population, contrasting our observations to the periods preceding the first wave and between both waves. Our findings suggest that the political discourse and risk narratives on immigration decreased during times of “tangible crises” for right-wing populist parties and news media. This happened at a time when key policies regarding immigration and regularization of migrants were highly discussed by the Italian government, receiving unexpectedly low reactions. This leads us to theorize that anti-immigrant communication decreases during times of “tangible crises.”
AslanidisP. (2018). Measuring populist discourse with semantic text analysis: An application on grassroots populist mobilization. Quality & Quantity, 52(3), 1241–1263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0517-4
2.
BeckU. (1992). Risk society: Towards a New Modernity (Vol. 17). Sage.
3.
BeckU. (1996). The reinvention of politics. Rethinking modernity in the global social order (pp. 1–216). Polity Press.
4.
BeckU. (2006). Cosmopolitan Vision. Polity Press.
5.
BobergS.QuandtT.Schatto-EckrodtT.FrischlichL. (2020). Pandemic populism: Facebook pages of alternative news media and the corona crisis–A computational content analysis. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.02566.
6.
BoeynaemsA.BurgersC.KonijnE. A. (2021). When figurative frames decrease political persuasion: The case of right-wing anti-immigration rhetoric. Discourse Processes, 58(3), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1851121
7.
BoomgaardenH.McLarenL.VliegenthartR. (2017). News coverage and public concern about immigration in Britain. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(2), 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw033
8.
BraccialeR.MartellaA. (2017). Define the populist political communication style: The case of Italian political leaders on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 20(9), 1310–1329. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1328522
9.
BrownG. D.LargeyA.McMullanC. (2021). The impact of gender on risk perception: Implications for EU member states’ national risk assessment processes. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 63(1), 102452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102452
10.
BryantJ.FondrenW. (2009). Displacement effects. In NabiR. L.OliverM. B. (Eds.), The sage handbook of Media processes and effects (pp. 505–516). Sage.
11.
BurgessA.WardmanJ.MythenG. (2018). Considering risk: Placing the work of Ulrich beck in context. Journal of Risk Research, 21(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2017.1383075
12.
CombeiC.GiannettiD. (2020). The immigration issue on twitter political communication in Italy 2018-2019. Comunicazione Politica, 21(2), 231–263. https://doi.org/10.3270/97905
13.
CrowdTangle Team (2020). CrowdTangle. Facebook, Menlo Park.
14.
Di MauroV.VerzichelliL. (2019). Political elites and immigration in Italy: Party competition, polarization and new cleavages. Contemporary Italian Politics, 11(4), 401–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/23248823.2019.1679960
15.
DouglasM. (2013). Risk and Blame. Routledge.
16.
EberlJ. M.HuberR. A.GreussingE. (2021). From populism to the “plandemic”: Why populists believe in COVID-19 conspiracies. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 31(sup1), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2021.1924730
17.
EberlJ. M.MeltzerC. E.HeidenreichT.HerreroB.TheorinN.LindF.StrömbäckJ. (2018). The European media discourse on immigration and its effects: A literature review. Annals of the International Communication Association, 42(3), 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2018.1497452
18.
FaircloughN. (1989). Language and Power. Longman.
19.
FischhoffB.SlovicP.LichtensteinS.ReadS.CombsB. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9, 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143739
20.
GerbaudoP. (2014). Populism 2.0. In TrottierD.FuchsC. (Eds.), Social media, politics and the state: Protests, revolutions, riots, crime and policing in the age of Facebook, twitter and YouTube (pp. 16–67). Routledge.
21.
GoodwynL. (1976). Democratic Promise: The Populist Moment in America. Oxford University Press.
22.
GottlobA.BoomgaardenH. (2020). The 2015 refugee crisis, uncertainty and the media: Representations of refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants in Austrian and French media. Communications, 45(s1), 841–863. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-2077
23.
GottlobA.BoomgaardenH. (2022). Risk propensity, news frames and immigration attitudes. International Journal of Communication, 16, 24. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/17263
24.
GreussingE.BoomgaardenH. G. (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. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1282813
25.
GründlJ. (2020). Populist ideas on social media: A dictionary-based measurement of populist communication. New Media & Society, 24(6), 1481–1499. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820976970
26.
GründlJ.AichholzerJ. (2020). Support for the populist radical right: Between uncertainty avoidance and risky choice. Political Psychology, 41(4), 641–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12643
27.
HallidayM. A. K. (1994). Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
28.
HarlowS. (2015). Losing focus: Goal displacement at an alternative newspaper in El Salvador. Media, Culture & Society, 37(8), 1119–1137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443715591665
29.
HeidenreichT.EberlJ. M.LindF.BoomgaardenH. (2019). Political migration discourses on social media: A comparative perspective on visibility and sentiment across political Facebook accounts in Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(7), 1261–1280. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1665990
30.
HeinischR.MassettiE.MazzoleniO. (Eds.). (2019). The People and the Nation: Populism and Ethno-Territorial Politics in Europe (1st ed.). Routledge.
HeissR.MatthesJ. (2020). Stuck in a nativist spiral: Content, selection, and effects of right-wing populists’ communication on Facebook. Political Communication, 37(3), 303–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1661890
33.
HeywoodA. (2015). Key Concepts in Politics and International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan.
34.
HierS. P.GreenbergJ. L. (2002). Constructing a discursive crisis: Risk, problematization and illegal Chinese in Canada. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25(3), 490–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870020036701
35.
HoggM. A. (2000). Subjective uncertainty reduction through self-categorization: A motivational theory of social identity processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11(1), 223–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792772043000040
36.
HorstiK. (2008). Hope and despair: Representation of Europe and Africa in news coverage of ‘migration crisis’.Communication Studies, 3, 125–156. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1694392
37.
LanzoneL.WoodsD. (2015). Riding the populist web: Contextualizing the five star movement (M5S) in Italy. Politics and Governance, 3(2), 54–64. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v3i2.246
38.
LechelerS.MatthesJ.BoomgaardenH. (2019). Setting the agenda for research on media and migration: State-of-the-art and directions for future research. Mass Communication and Society, 22(6), 691–707. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2019.1688059
39.
LiuM.ZhangH.HuangH. (2020). Media exposure to COVID-19 information, risk perception, social and geographical proximity, and self-rated anxiety in China. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1649. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09761-8
40.
LowndesJ. (2017). Populism in the United States. In Rovira KaltwasserC.TaggartP.Ochoa EspejoP.OstiguyP. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of populism (pp. 232–247). Oxford University Press.
41.
MachinD.MayrA. (2012). How To Do Critical Discourse Analysis. Sage.
42.
MacnamaraJ. R. (2005). Media content analysis: Its uses, benefits and best practice methodology. Asia Pacific Public Relations Journal, 6(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lci133
43.
Maltone-BonnenfantC. (2011). L'immigrazione nei media Italiani. Disinformazione, stereotipi e innovazioni. Line@editoriale, 3(3), 62–78. https://hal.science/hal-02641035
44.
Miłkowska-SamulK. (2018). Il discorso anti-immigrazione: Migranti, immigrati, profughi, rifugiati nei social media Italiani. Confini e Zone di Frontiera Negli/Degli Studi Italiani, 61–74.
MoscaL.TronconiF. (2019). Beyond left and right: The eclectic populism of the five star movement. West European Politics, 42(6), 1258–1283. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2019.1596691
PadovaniC. (2018). Lega nord and anti-immigrationism: The importance of hegemony critique for social media analysis and protest. International Journal of Communication, 12(27), 3553–3579.
49.
PierriF.ArtoniA.CeriS. (2020). Investigating Italian disinformation spreading on Twitter in the context of 2019 European elections. PloS One, 15(1), e0227821. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227821
50.
RooduijnM.Van KesselS.FroioC.PirroA.De LangeS.HalikiopoulouD.LewisP.MuddeC.TaggartP. (2019). The PopuList: An Overview of Populist, Far Right, Far Left and Eurosceptic Parties in Europe. www.popu-list.org.
51.
ScheufeleD. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society, 3(2-3), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0323_07
SlovicP. (1999). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis: An International Journals, 19(4), 689–701. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007041821623
54.
SlovicP.LichtensteinS.FischhoffB. (1979). Images of disaster: perception and acceptance of risks from nuclear power.
55.
SnidermanP. M.HagendoornL.PriorM. (2004). Predisposing factors and situational triggers: Exclusionary reactions to immigrant minorities’. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305540400098X
TeoP. (2000). Racism in the news. A critical discourse analysis of news reporting in two Australian newspapers. Discourse & Society, 11(1), 7–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926500011001002
58.
UngarS. (2001). Moral panic versus the risk society: The implications of the changing sites of social anxiety. The British Journal of Sociology, 52(2), 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071310120044980
WirthW.EsserF.WettsteinM.EngesserS.WirzD.SchulzA.ErnstN.BüchelF.CaramaniD.ManucciL.SteenbergenM.BernhardL.WeberE.HänggliR.DalmusC.SchemerC. (2016). The appeal of populist ideas, strategies and styles: A theoretical model and research design for analyzing populist political communication. University of Zurich: Working Paper 88 of the National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) on Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
