Media Governance and Industries Lab Blog

By Krisztina Rozgonyi

On 20 August 2015 Al Jazeera decided they would no longer use the word ‘migrant’ but instead, where appropriate, say ‘refugee’. The editorial decision was based on their recognition that the term ‘migrant’ was “no longer fit for purpose when it comes to describing the horror unfolding in the Mediterranean, as it has evolved from its dictionary definitions into a tool that dehumanises and distances, a blunt pejorative”.

The media’s role is crucial in the portrayal and representation of the victims of the current crisis, particularly in the context of the protection of their human rights and the promotion of an environment where they have a chance of integration.

Al Jazeera’ belief in journalism as the voice of the most vulnerable, challenging discourses in which hate speech and racism might fester, has sparked intense debate about potential legal consequences.

The UNHCR argued strongly in their rapid response that “conflating refugees and migrants can have serious consequences for the lives and safety of refugees” and could undermine the inherent legal content of the definition, thus obscuring the responsibilities, or perception of responsibilities, of states under international law.

International law offers differing protections to the various categories of people forced to leave their homes either fleeing armed conflict or persecution, or as a result of their poor living conditions.

A ‘migrant’, as defined by the UN, is “any person who changes his or her country of usual residence”. The definition serves as an umbrella that includes ‘refugees’, who in turn are people “fleeing conflict or persecution on the basis of race, religion, national, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”.

Under the 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention countries are legally obliged to offer shelter to a refugee and are forbidden from expelling or returning someone to a place where where their life or freedom would be threatened.

Thus, there is significant importance attached to differentiation between the terms ‘migrant’ and ‘refugee’ in the legal context.

But their use as linguistic labels, especially by the media, is of equal importance.

Al Jazeera has rightly acknowledged that there is no ‘migrant’ crisis in the Mediterranean. They rightly judge that the enormous number of people “fleeing unimaginable misery and danger and a smaller number of people trying to escape the sort of poverty that drives some to desperation” necessitates the use of the term ‘refugees’ when describing, framing and portraying the crisis – and  outweighs the need for legal accuracy.

The results of current research and study of linguistic labels evoking social judgments and far-reaching consequences for political debate and public opinion underscore the relevance of this ongoing debate.

Since January 2015, almost 900,000 migrants, including refugees, have arrived in Europe according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The conflict in Syria, violence in Afghanistan, abuses in Eritrea, as well as poverty in Kosovo are examples of key drivers forcing people to look for new lives elsewhere.