***** VAN DIJK ********* EJC/REC Vol. 5, No. 2&3, 1995 *****

A PROPOSAL FOR MULTICULTURAL MEDIA MONITORING IN EUROPE


Teun A. van Dijk
University of Amsterdam


        Abstract:  The suggestions formulated below are
     based on previous research on news structures, the
     relations between racism and the press, as well as
     about the reception of news by the audience.  It
     is argued that besides practical suggestions, a
     new theoretical framework needs to be elaborated
     about the forms and functions of news and other
     media messages so that practical recommendations,
     critique and monitoring will have the desired
     effects.


     It hardly needs to be repeated that European racism,
ethnocentrism, anti-semitism and xenophobia are still on the
rise, and begin to have alarming effects on the human rights
of immigrants, refugees and other (mostly non-European)
minorities, as well as on the democratic structures of the
European Nation-States.

     Racism never has been limited to extremist right-wing
parties, and these parties or similar racist organizations
are not the only and not the most important reason for
concern.  Rather, racist ideas that once were expressed only
on the extreme Right have now affected mainstream parties.

     Immigration is severely being restricted in virtually
all countries of the European Union and elsewhere in Western
Europe, and the European Fortress is no longer merely a
rhetorical scare-word, but begins to take an increasingly
concrete form.

     Besides these official political measures to "curb" the
immigration of unwanted Others, each domain of European
societies shows signs of deteriorating human rights.
Attacks on immigrants have become so widespread and common,
not only in Germany, that they are no longer even routinely
covered in the media.  More or less subtle discrimination
and everyday racism in housing, employment, health care,
legislation, and policing have become general practice.

                         The Media

     As may be expected from mainstream institutions, the
media are an inherent part of that problem.  Especially the
conservative and popular press indulges in sometimes blatant
"foreigner-bashing" and the reproduction and affirmation of
racist prejudices.  Popular resentment against refugees and
other immigrants and minorities is thus both legitimated and
at the same time exacerbated.  Politicians in turn respond
to the popular resentment they have helped create through
the media in the first place by ever tougher legislation
against immigration.

     Even the more liberal and quality press does not
systematically and critically oppose the rising tide of
racism.  On the contrary, they have taken part in the
well-known elite denial of racism, especially also by
ignoring their own role in the elite management of 'race
relations'.  In line with the prevalent no-nonsense policies
that are leading to the gradual destruction of the welfare
state, also these race relations policies have become
harsher, and such policies are generally supported, or at
least hardly criticized by the elite press.

     The forms this popular and elite press response to
immigration and increasing multiculturalism has taken are
among the following:

     - Immigration is generally defined as a serious
       problem, as a threat or an invasion, and never
       as a welcome contribution to ethnic and cultural
       diversity, the economy and the demography of
       Western Europe.

     - Refugees and other new immigrants are
       increasingly defined, also in the press, as
       impostors, scroungers or otherwise defined as
       negative; and increasing limitations of their
       rights welcomed, or hardly criticized.

     - Similarly, in all societal domains, the presence
       of new immigrants or resident minorities,
       continues to be portrayed in similarly negative
       terms, that is as a problem (for Us), if not as
       a threat to the Nation.

     - In the news negative other-presentation combined
       with self-serving positive self-presentation is
       as routine as in other types of elite discourse.
       Thus, crime reporting still associates
       minorities (and especially young minority males)
       with specific forms of 'ethnic' crime, such as
       aggression, mugging, rioting, theft,
       prostitution and especially drugs.

     - In the same perspective, prevalent everyday
       racism is ignored or denied, and seldom defined
       as Our problem.  Only racist violence and
       aggression (as were the skinhead attacks on
       minorities in Germany) or blatant forms of
       discrimination are criticized.  Everyday
       discrimination in many domains of society is
       hardly newsworthy.

     - The prevailing discrimination by employers,
       which is among the main causes of high minority
       employment, is seldom critically analyzed.
       Programs of affirmative action, if any, are
       generally rejected both by employers and
       politicians, as well as by the media and other
       elite institutions, and often presented as
       "unfair competition" or as "favoring
       foreigners"; they may exacerbate popular
       resentment -- again, a form of resentment they
       have helped define and create in the first
       place.

     - Topics that are especially relevant for
       minorities are virtually excluded, so that the
       top five topics associated with minorities is in
       fact a standard list of stereotypes rather than
       an account of the multiple newsworthy events,
       domains and actions in which minorities are
       involved.

     - Minority organizations, leaders and
       spokespersons have less access to the media than
       their 'white' mainstream counterparts, even in
       news that directly concerns them, and about
       which they may be seen as experts.  They are
       less quoted, and less credibly quoted, than
       mainstream news actors and organizations.

     - The increasing number of competent minority
       journalists face systematic forms of
       discrimination in hiring, and if they are hired
       at all, in promotion.  Virtually no European
       newspaper has minority editors or in other
       prominent positions.

     - Journalists generally resent even voluntary
       codes for adequate reporting on 'race', and see
       such codes as a limitation of the freedom of the
       press.

     - There is no special training for young
       journalists in the balanced coverage of
       multi-cultural society.

     In sum the role of the media in the increasingly
multi-cultural and multi-ethnic societies of the Europe is
crucial.  Whereas many, if not most, native citizens in most
countries have little or no daily interaction with
immigrants, information about immigration as well as ethnic
groups, events and relations is largely based on information
from the mass media (or from informal everyday conversations
that are in turn based on information from the media).

     Research in several countries has repeatedly shown that
although few major media, and especially television and the
quality press, are explicitly and blatantly racist, few
media play a positive role in the active promotion of a just
and peaceful multicultural society.  Minority journalists
are as discriminated against as workers in any other social
domain.  Reporting is not seldom stereotypical, and rather
exclusively focuses on negative events and situations
(financial troubles, illegal immigration, crime, drugs,
cultural deviance, etc.), and attributes associated with, if
not explicitly blamed on ethnic minorities, immigrants or
refugees.  On the other hand, similarly detailed negative
and critical accounts of everyday discrimination and racism
by members of the majority, and especially among the elites,
are lacking.  News gathering, story assignment, topics,
quotation, and style are thus systematically stacked against
the Others.  It is not surprising, in light of this
incontrovertible scholarly evidence, that -- exacerbated by
social and economic problems -- widespread resentment
against immigrants and minorities are stimulated and
confirmed by such media practices.

     Therefore, as is the case for all domains, sectors and
institutions of all European countries, it is imperative
that such media practices be monitored on a regular basis,
and various measures be taken to improve them within the
overall goal of shaping a viable, humane and peaceful
multicultural Europe.  Given the essential freedom of the
press, such an aim can obviously only be reached if
journalists themselves identify with such multicultural aims
and become both personally and institutionally involved in
the creation of truly multicultural media.  However, other
institutions and organizations are also needed to cooperate
in the realization of this aim.  Thus, universities or
professional schools are involved in the education of
journalists as well as in research on the coverage of ethnic
affairs in the media.  And yet, the main responsibility lies
with the media themselves, and a media monitoring project
can be successful and effective only when it is able to
persuade journalists to change their practices.

                         Monitoring

     By 'media monitoring' we shall here understand a series
of observational, analytical, evaluative and critical
activities by independent (non-media) organizations
focussing on the practices and the products of mass media
and media workers.  Such a critical evaluation of media
performance presupposes a set of criteria and values and
aims at an improvement of media practices and products in
light of fairly generally accepted social, cultural and
political conceptions about the role of the media in
society.

     Hence, media monitoring is not a form of control, let
alone a limitation of the freedom of the press.  Its aim is
not to impose or advocate prohibitions, but to persuade
media workers to adopt or enact recognized professional
standards of quality, balance, fairness and social
responsibility.  In the context described above of growing
intolerance, xenophobia and racism in Europe, such standards
have become especially important if the media are to play a
positive role in the development of egalitarian
multicultural societies in which the human rights of
immigrants and minorities are respected.

     Media monitoring should be carried out by people or
groups who understand media practices, products and
organization, or who are specialized in a relevant dimension
of media performance or its role in society.  That is, media
monitoring may variously focus on the following aspects of
the media:

     - schooling of journalists and other media workers

     - hiring and promotion of media workers, also from
       minority groups

     - training on the job

     - the general 'management of diversity' in the
       media organization

     - the development and evaluation of non-racist and
       multicultural policies

     - new and refresher courses on multicultural
       reporting

     - relations with other organizations and
       institutions, e.g., those of politics

     - news gathering routines (the 'beat')

     - the use of, or interaction with sources

     - using press releases or other documents

     - participating in press conferences

     - interviewing news sources and guests at programs

     - writing news, editorials and background articles

     - dealing with readers

     - the various products (texts and programs) of
       media workers:  news, articles, documentaries,
       film, advertisements, shows, etc.

     Despite this variety of dimensions of the media
involved in media monitoring, many of the monitoring
activities focus on the evaluation of the actual 'products'
of the media:  news and background articles in the press,
and various programs on television.  However, if critical
analysis of such products concludes that such products are
not up to standards, several other dimensions of the
organization of media institutions may be considered, viz.,
as a mode of explanation or in view of recommending
improvements.  Thus, unbalanced or biased topic choice in
reporting about ethnic affairs may be attributed to
inadequate education, the absence of a code or policy for
such reporting, failing editorial control, and/or to the
lack of minority reporters or editors in the newsroom.

     Critical analysis and evaluation is merely one side of
media monitoring.  Even more important are the establishment
of good relationships with the media, the constructive and
persuasive formulation of alternatives and improvements,
involving management, editors as well as reporters and other
media workers, and in general all activities that aim at an
effective improvement of media performance according to the
criteria set by generally accepted and respected social and
media values.  At this point, strategies need to be worked
out and links with other organizations may need to be made
(e.g., with universities who educate journalists, with
organizations of journalists, with organizations of
minorities, or with NGO's who monitor the media).  Further
activities may include documentation, training and lectures,
and in some (usually extreme) cases also litigation.

                          Project

     Thorough expert and responsible media monitoring is a
very difficult and time-consuming job.  The range of media
products and activities, summarized above is very large, and
the complexity of their analysis and evaluation tremendous.
For each country (or each language) a large institution
would be needed to carry out such monitoring reliably and
responsibly.  And within each country the number and
frequency of the various media is beyond any form of daily
monitoring.  At the moment, financial restrictions of most
member states are such that, even if sufficient political
goodwill and academic expertise were there, such
institutions are not likely to be founded in the near
future.

     Hence, it is here proposed to set up, fund and support
a restricted, flexible and cost-effective system of
monitoring working groups.  These small working groups would
be responsible for monitoring a highly selective number of
influential media, such as major national newspapers and
popular TV programs.  Their analyses would focus primarily
on those properties of media products and other activities
that are especially relevant for the role of the media in a
multicultural society.

     Initial, preparatory, work of such bureaus should
consist of getting some schooling in media monitoring and
the analysis of media and racism, reading relevant
literature on the media in multicultural societies,
developing evaluation criteria, contacting similar groups
abroad, and so on.

     In a next phase, actual monitoring will begin by
identifying which newspapers, programs or networks will be
covered, registered, coded, documented, analyzed and/or
evaluated.  Contacts will be established with journalists or
other workers related to these media or programs, so as to
guarantee in an early stage that future cooperation with
these will be possible.

     The main phase of monitoring is the routine
registration, documentation and analysis of media content
and practices.  Critical evaluation, based on relevant
criteria is the main immediate goal of such monitoring.

     However, the ultimate goal is change:  To persuade
mediamakers to adapt their work to the criteria of
professional quality, fairness, and social responsibility
within the broader framework of the role of the media in
society.  That is, in the crucial final phase of monitoring,
regular interaction with mediamakers will be necessary to
discuss the implications of critical evaluation and
recommendations.  Strategies may be jointly developed to
improve media output, such as improving journalism
education, training on the job, seminars, enhanced editorial
control, and closer involvement of readers or social
organizations.

     Finally, such processes of change themselves need to be
critically evaluated:  What strategies of change work, or do
not work?  What expectations do journalists have of media
monitoring?  Should media monitoring and consulting be
adapted to the 'reality' of a mixture of goodwill and
resistance against 'outside interference' with the 'internal
affairs' of the media?  Or should independent criteria based
on the interests of media-users, those portrayed in the
media, or various social organizations prevail over those of
journalists?  Indeed, should the media be considered as a
'service' to society, or merely as powerful, profit-oriented
enterprises that primarily serve their own interests?  These
are some of the fundamental questions that need to be dealt
with in any serious form of media monitoring, especially
when the coverage of ethnic affairs is involved.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Author Information:  Teun A. van Dijk
                     University of Amsterdam
                     210 Spuitstraat
                     1012 VT Amsterdam
                     The Netherlands
                     teun@alf.let.uva.nl
------------------------------------------------------------
                      Copyright 1995
   Communication Institute for Online Scholarship, Inc.

     This file may not be publicly distributed or reproduced
without written permission of the Communication Institute
for Online Scholarship, P.O.  Box 57, Rotterdam Jct., NY
12150 USA (phone:  518-887-2443).