presented in The Times and The Guardian contains snippets of information on the positives and negatives of the plan while maintaining relative neutrality on the topic. On the counter, the Alex article immediately attacks the plan as well as European Union countries.
When looking at the individual coverage of the issues and conflicts with the flow of immigration to Europe it is obvious that The Times and The Guardian utilize “false balancing” by stating broad facts and using one direct quote source, while Alex’s article presents subjective opinions designed to instill fear in the reader about Europe’s response to the immigration. The conflicts and issues associated with immigration are glanced over by Alex as he says, “European cities
…show more content…
The Guardian takes a more subjective approach to the immigration issue than The Times in this case, which can be attributed to their geographic and political interest with the EU. The Guardian uses a Juncker quote, “too many people not entitled to asylum enter the European Union illegally and remain there, and often despite legal proceedings that conclude they should return home.” (2). Utilizing “card stacking” against the immigrants by Juncker does show some vague resemblance to the viewpoint of Alex’s article, showcasing the negative effects of immigration. However, The Guardian presents the negative side to the issue by using a quote which enhances the credibility by not just selectively picking quotes that remain fairly neutral, like The Times. This negativity can be attributed to the fact that Britain, as a nation critical to the EU, would favor a quote by the EU president admitting that his plan and organization does have significant flaws. So The Guardian will undoubtedly favor the inclusion of quotes pertinent to the issues of the EU.
Portraying the effects of the mass immigration on the economy is portrayed optimistically with limited detail by both The Times and The Guardian, but the Alex article picks apart and points out and defines the negative effects on the economy of Europe in great detail. A
It has been said that Immigration damage the economy. This is not true because foreigners help American economy to prosper. Immigration increases purchasing, and increases demand for labor. Immigration not only takes jobs, but also creates them. For instance, a man comes to America from Italy; this man opens a small Italian restaurant, this restaurant becomes prosper during the years. Five years later, this Italian man owns two more restaurants and employs twenty Americans. Similar stories, which help our economy, have happened from the beginning of the immigration times.
Giving into the demands of upset citizens, different political parties began to campaign with planks in their platforms dedicated to legally destroying immigration. The Austrian Freedom Party, for instance, campaigned to increase the amount of laws that prevent immigration and to make it more difficult for non-Austrians to live and work amongst the Austrian people (Doc 6). By creating a platform to change a country’s laws, it is clear Europeans were so upset with immigration that they wanted to make fundamental changes in their governments’ policies. People were unhappy with how their society was transforming and they wanted to put official rules in place that would allow Europe to return to its former state. Enoch Powell, a member of the Conservative Party, brought this common desire to light by explaining that people did not want to live in a country filled with immigrants, so action needed to be taken in order to curb the high immigration levels (Doc 2). The fact that many Europeans wanted politicians to take a stand against immigration shows how upset people were with the rising numbers of immigration, which became roughly 500,000 immigrants per year. By involving the government, European citizens were able to project their anti-immigration sentiment into the rest of the continent. Involving politicians and political parties shows how adament some Europeans were about keeping foreigners out of
There is question on whether or not the immigrants will help or hurt the economy. Some say immigrants will take jobs from Americans and damper U.S. tax rolls because they aren’t as skilled or educated. The fact is immigrants actually increase “overall wages and the pool of jobs” and add to the U.S. revenue (Dwoskin). In 2006 there was a suspected “21 million immigrants, about 15 percent of the labor force, [that] h[e]ld jobs in the U.S.” However, the U.S. only had about seven million unemployed. “So the majority of immigrants can't literally have "taken" jobs; they must be doing jobs that wouldn't have existed had the immigrants not been here,” (Lowenstein). Roger Lowenstein also presents a valid and insightful point in stating that immigrants who take these jobs that “wouldn’t have existed”, relative prices could be lowered in a similar way that global trade does.
Throughout the article, “The Framing of Immigration,” George Lakoff and Sam Ferguson hold an affirmative tone encouraging the public to view immigration not only politically, but also emotionally. The authors’ claim that today’s current debate on immigration is not fully grasping all the aspects, such as an analyzing immigrant's reasons for fleeing and how they live in America, later affecting it -- these reason must be taken into account to find an efficient solution where all countries must help to end this conflict. To emphasis their main claim they break down immigration, analyzing how they are referred to in a degrading manner, are being treated unfairly by the government in America, and encouraging readers to understand their perspective.
Media outlets often inflate or speculate about either the numbers of asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants. Hence causing the public to feel threatened by these numbers. Not only does the media scrutinise numbers but newspapers and television images and videos play “dominant stereotype of the young dangerous man breaking into Australia and threatening ‘our’ communities 7”. Unsurprisingly “31 precent of headlines and 53 precent of text about asylum across all newspapers has negative connotations. The media has had a detrimental affect on the outcome of the Australian security border protection by continually asking the question “What is being done to prevent these terrorist acts from the public? 7”
In the article, “Media can Broaden the Immigration Debate by Putting a Human Face on Immigrant Experiences” by Richard Pineda not only simplifies immigration as a whole, but essentially lacks the sufficient amount of information that would effectively validate why the economic impact of immigration in America is so eminent. Because immigration is such a broad topic, authors like Pineda have essentially focused on only one aspect to examine and analyze; however, the evidence provided in this particular article does not clarify any of the existing ambiguity of the issue. In this case, Pineda asserts that, “the United States will always have economic enticements and global economic pressure requiring workforces to move into a place much more
Immigration issues have been in the news; and have been debated by politicians. Political parties over the years have been vocal in voicing their concerns about American immigration (Russit, 2013).
Over the last decade, the number of immigrants has increased tremendously growing from 331,000 to a whopping 409,000. An increase of about 78,000 people ( Britannica). Despite media coverage on the issue many people are blind to the true nature of the situation . Therefore it is important to understand the extent to which immigration affects us all.
Caldwell argues that “Western Europe became a multi-ethnic society in a fit of absence of mind.” European policymakers imported people from Africa and the middle east to fill short term labor shortages in post-war Europe, Germany especially. For the first time in modern history, immigrants have a substantial presence in Europe. Islam is the continent’s second largest religion. These immigrants continued to multiply even as the jobs disappeared: the number of foreign residents in Germany increased from 3m in 1971 to 7.5m in 2000 And by 2050, the foreign-origin populations in most European countries will be between 20 and 32%. even though the number of foreigners in the workforce did not budge. Today immigrants account for about 10% of the population of most west European countries, and up to 30% in some of Europe 's great cities. These same policymakers made the assumption that immigrants would quickly adopt the moral and cultural norms of their host societies. The heavy industries
For a long time, the issue of immigrants has generated debate amongst people in the
This particular study started with the comparison of certain immigration news and articles in which three separate British newspapers had published in the entire year of 2003. The Daily Telegraph, the Guardian, and the Independent are the media sources in which this case is based
For one thing, the Europe is a discussion all on it’s own; as Europe’s is able to rule out a certain type, it will give an example to the article of how there isn’t even another option. Krugman implies, “What the European establishment may not have realized, however, is that its ability to define the limits of discourse rests on the perception that it knows what it is doing,” (Krugman). This is it’s ugly truth that Europe’s establishments, although, strived to be a respected political nation, have failed in attempts to be seen as one riding prejudice, but rather be problematic if there is no alternative, just a “path of wisdom”.
Sweden’s political reaction is both measurable and significant in terms of the incessantly evolving political climate of Europe towards the immigration issue. Since 1989, the Swedes have been asked annually what issues they think are the most important in Sweden
Because Norway has an extensive border neighboring Sweden, Finland, and Russia, immigration has long been an issue for the Norwegian government. BBC News. (n.d.) reports on how xenophobic attitudes and political pressure coupled with nationalistic sentiment creates distressing rhetoric resulting in fear for many Norwegians. Norway has devised plans to deport migrants back to their country of origin given the country is deemed safe. These policies have come under the
But at a critical level of analysis, it can be said that there have been many distributional impacts which means that competition levels in the market rose and businesses experienced more rivalry. As the years have passed since the 1940s, the pressure of migration has increased and the impact of immigration on the UK local communities have also been obvious especially at a time of rapid change that Britain is going through continually from time to time. This is why countries need to maintain the laws and policies for migration and control the negative effects (Ham, 2010, p. 152).