Twitter-based analysis of anti-refugee discourses in Türkiye

Abstract

As the number of refugees in Türkiye continues to grow, the constructed discourse of welcoming refugees with open arms has weakened, transforming the image of refugees from ‘guests’ to ‘threats’. Social media platforms are used to spread hate speech, discrimination, racism, and otherization. Drawing on the Corpus-assisted Critical Discourse Analysis approach, the present research investigates how language is used to produce online discourses in tweets about refugees in the aftermath of a major social triggering event in Türkiye. This mixed-methods study incorporated both a corpus analysis of tweets posted on Twitter over a specific period, as well as a critical discourse analysis of a randomly selected subset of 100 tweets. The findings revealed that the prevalence of discontent and frustration of the host population against refugees has turned into a discourse of discrimination, hate, and racism. Moreover, a negative portrayal of refugees was created and maintained not only through lexical choices, but also characteristics attributed to them, as well as assumptions and prejudices about them.

Keywords

Afghan refugees corpus-assisted linguistic critical discourse analysis critical discourse analysis exclusion marginalization migrants racist online discourse Syrian refugees Türkiye Twitter

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adi

Erickson

Lilleker

(2014) Elite tweets: Analyzing the Twitter communication patterns of labour party peers in the House of Lords. Policy and Internet 6(1): 1–27.

Akar

Erdoğdu

(2019) Syrian refugees in Turkey and integration problem ahead. Journal of International Migration and Integration 20(3): 925–940.

Alakoc

Goksel

Zarychta

(2022) Political discourse and public attitudes toward Syrian refugees in Turkey. Comparative Politics 54(3): 547–571.

Androutsopoulos

(2013) Online data collection. In: Mallison

Childs

van Herk

(eds) Data Collection in Sociolinguistics: Methods and Applications. London: Routledge, pp.236–250.

Awan

Blakemore

(2012) Policing Cyber Hate, Cyber Threats and Cyber Terrorism. Farnham: Ashgate.

Baker

(2006) Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Continuum.

Baker

Gabrielatos

Khosravinik

, et al. (2008) A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse and Society 19(3): 273–306.

Balabanova

Trandafoiu

(2020) Media, migration and human rights: Discourse and resistance in the context of the erosion of liberal norms. Journal of Language and Politics 19(3): 379–390.

Blommaert

(2005) Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

10.

Bouscarec

(2021) His family fled Afghanistan. In Turkey, other Afghans help them build a new life. Available at: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/20/1035455391/afghanistanrefugees-flee-taliban-turkey (accessed 14 March 2022).

11.

Chan

Ghose

Seamans

(2016) The internet and racial hate crime: Offline spillovers from online access. Mis Quarterly 40(2): 381–403.

12.

Erdogan-Ozturk

Isik-Guler

(2020) Discourses of exclusion on Twitter in the Turkish Context:# ülkemdesuriyeliistemiyorum (# idontwantsyriansinmycountry). Discourse, Context & Media 36: 100400.

13.

Fairclough

(1995) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.

14.

Fairclough

Wodak

(1997) Critical discourse analysis. In Van Dijk

(ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction, vol. 2. London: SAGE, pp.258–284.

15.

Fotopoulos

Kaimaklioti

(2016) Media discourse on the refugee crisis: On what have the Greek, German and British press focused? European View 15(2): 265–279.

16.

Gall

(2021) Afghan refugees find a harsh and unfriendly border in Turkey. The New York Times, 23 August. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/world/europe/afghanistan-refugees-turkey-iran-taliban-airport.html (accessed 14 March 2022).

17.

Goodman

Sirriyeh

McMahon

(2017) The evolving (re)categorisations of refugees throughout the ‘refugee/migrant crisis’. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 27(2): 105–114.

18.

Goodman

Speer

(2007) Category use in the construction of asylum seekers. Critical Discourse Studies 4(2): 165–185.

19.

Google (2007) Success! Google Trends updated. Inside Google. Available at: http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2007/07/30/success-google-trends-updated/ (accessed December 5 2021).

20.

Halliday

(1993) Quantitative studies and probabilities in grammar. In Hoey

(ed.) Data, Description, Discourse – Papers on The English Language in Honour of John McH. Sinclair on his Sixtieth Birthday. London: HarperCollins Publishers, pp.1–25.

21.

Harris

(1952) Discourse analysis. Language 28(1): 1–30.

22.

Heidenreich

Lind

Eberl

, et al. (2019) Media framing dynamics of the ‘European refugee crisis’: A comparative topic modelling approach. Journal of Refugee Studies, 32(Special_Issue_1): i172–i182.

23.

Hermann

(2020) Opinion: Afghan refugees not welcome. DW. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-afghan-refugees-not-welcome/a-52666497 (accessed 14 March 2022).

24.

Hunston

(2002) Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

25.

King

Sutton

(2013) High times for hate crime: Explaining the temporal clustering of hate motivated offending. Criminology 51(4): 871–94.

26.

Kirisçi

(2014) Syrian refugees and Turkey’s challenges: Going beyond hospitality. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/Syrian-Refugees-and-TurkeysChallenges-May-14-2014.pdf (accessed 14 March 2022).

27.

Koca

(2016) Syrian refugees in Turkey: From ‘guests’ to ‘enemies’? New Perspectives on Turkey 54: 55–75.

28.

Korkut

(2014) The migration myth in the absence of immigrants: How does the conservative right in Hungary and Turkey grapple with immigration? Comparative European Politics 12(6): 620–636.

29.

Kreis

(2017) #refugeesnotwelcome: Anti-refugee discourse on Twitter. Discourse & Communication 11(5): 498–514.

30.

Leudar

Hayes

Nekvapil

, et al. (2008) Hostility themes in media, community and refugee narratives. Discourse & Society 19(2): 187–221.

31.

Lynn

Lea

(2003) A phantom menace and the new Apartheid’: The social construction of asylum-seekers in the United Kingdom. Discourse & Society 14(4): 425–452.

32.

Mautner

(2009) Checks and balances: How corpus linguistics can contribute to CDA. In Wodak

Meyer

(eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE, pp.122–143.

33.

McEnery

Wilson

(2001) Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

34.

Ozduzen

Korkut

Ozduzen

(2021) ‘Refugees are not welcome’: Digital racism, online place-making and the evolving categorization of Syrians in Turkey. New Media & Society, 23(11): 3349–3369.

35.

Öztürk

(2021) Altındağ incidents: Legal action was initiated against 61 people. BBC. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-dunya-58267290 (accessed 14 March 2022).

36.

Page

Barton

Unger

, et al. (2014) Researching Language and Social Media: A Student Guide. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor & Francis.

37.

Partington

(2008) The armchair and the machine: Corpus-assisted discourse research. In Torsello

Ackerley

Castello

(eds) Corpora for University Language Teachers. Bern: Peter Lang. pp.95–118.

38.

Partington

Morley

Haarman

(2004). Corpora and Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.

39.

Sharma

(2013) Black Twitter? Racial hashtags, networks and contagion. New Formations: A Journal of Culture/Theory/Politics 78(1): 46–64.

40.

Statista (2021) Leading countries based on number of Twitter users as of October 2021. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-twitter-users-in-selectedcountries/ (accessed 5 December 2021).

41.

Taşdelen

(2020) Twitter’da suriyeli mültecilere karşı çevrimiçi nefret söylemi; #suriyelileriistemiyoruz. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Elektronik Dergisi 11(2): 562–575.

42.

Tognini-Bonelli

(2001) Corpus linguistics at work. Computational Linguistics 28(4): 583–583.

43.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2021) Refugees and asylum seekers in Turkey. UNHCR. Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/tr/en/refugees-and-asylum-seekers-in-turkey (accessed 5 December 2021).

44.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (n.d.) Figures at a glance. UNHCR. Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html (accessed 14 March 2022).

45.

Van Dijk

(1993) Elite Discourse and Racism. London: SAGE.

46.

Van Dijk

(2009) Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis 2(1): 62–86.

47.

Verweij

(2012) Twitter links between politicians and journalists. Journalism Practice 6(5–6): 680–691.

48.

Widdowson

(1995) Discourse analysis: A critical view. Language and Literature 4(3): 157–172.

49.

Wodak

(2001) The discourse historical approach. In: Wodak

Meyer

(eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE, pp.63–94.

50.

Wodak

(2015) Discrimination via discourse. In: Bonvillain

(ed.) Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology. London: Routledge, pp.366–383.

51.

Zucchino

(2021). The U.S. war in Afghanistan: How it started, and how it ended. New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/article/afghanistan-war-us.html (accessed 14 March 2022).