http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2011/07/25/comment-anti-immigrant-tabloids-have-questionBut
let us not pretend that the cacophony of anti-immigrant rhetoric sweeping Europe has no consequence. It is perfectly acceptable – important even – for a debate to take place on immigration. There are concerns around the forcing down of domestic wages, the affect on communities and the sense it gives people that they are not in control of their own lives.
That debate is quite separate to the misleading bile which fills our newspapers on a daily basis.Nick Davies, the man responsible for dragging the phone-hacking scandal into the cold light of day, conducted an excellent analysis of
how the Daily Mail tweaks reality to satisfy its relentlessly anti-immigration platform. He cites a July 2003 story proclaiming that "asylum-seekers infected with the Aids virus are putting public health at risk, MPs will warn today". The actual report contradicts the claim. While 90% of Aids in the heterosexual community was contracted in sub-Saharan Africa, the infected tended to come from countries which rarely applied for asylum, such as South Africa or Zambia, while those who applied the most came from countries with very low instances of Aids infection, such as Iraq or Afghanistan.
Take the Sun's opinion column headline,
a variation of which could be read in the paper nearly every day: "Many asylum-seekers are no more than dole-scroungers." The tabloid was not so keen to highlight
Refugee Council research which found that three-quarters of asylum seekers "had no knowledge of welfare benefits and support before coming to the UK – most had no expectation they would be given financial support".
Another tabloid favourite is the myth of asylum seekers going to the front of the social housing queue. This is false. A report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission found zero evidence for this oft-repeated allegation. Absurdly, and with a trace of comedy even its editors must have found satisfying, the Daily Mail reported it with the headline:
"One in ten social houses go to immigrants".Whatever else it is, it's not journalism. Journalism communicates accurate information. Sometimes these tabloid stories are simply out-and-out lies. More often, they are misleading accounts of reports or statistics.
They are published with a political agenda: to limit immigration to the UK. Sometimes they are motivated by genuine political concerns.
Usually, I suspect, they are motivated by what Breivik called his desire for "monoculture". That's not racism. It's distinct. But much of the attack on multiculturalism has at its heart an aversion to diversity.