In o ma ion on e ugees in he Eu opean Pa liamen ’s Vi ual P ess Room: A
c i ical analysis
Recei ed 19 Augus 2020; Accep ed 20 Sep embe 2021
Au o a Labio-Be nal
Uni e sidad de Se illa
Tenu ed Jou nalism Lec u e a he Uni e si y o Se ille. PhD and bachelo ’s deg ee in jou nalism,
she is di ec o o he esea ch g oup Media, Communica ion Policies and Democ acy in he
Eu opean Union (DEMOC-MEDIA). He esea ch ac i i y has ocused on Poli ical Economy o
Communica ion and Media Sys em S udies. She has been a isi ing lec u e a he Uni e si y o
Wes mins e (2014) and a he Au onomous Uni e si y o Ba celona (2010).
Con ac : Facul ad de Comunicación, A da. Amé ico Vespucio, s/n, Se ille 41092, Spain.
E-mail: au o [email p o ec ed]
h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-5195-0012
Claudia Taboada-Cas ell
Uni e sidad de Se illa
Mas e in Communica ion and Cul u e by he Uni e si y o Se ille, G adua e in Social
Communica ion wi h Hono s a he Uni e si y o Ha ana, Cuba. Fo me Head o Co po a e
Communica ion and P ess Cabine a he Caguayo Founda ion o A s in Ha ana, Cuba. He
Resea ch ac i i y has ocused on co po a e communica ion unc ioning in digi al en i onmen s,
Vi ual P ess Rooms and media aming. Cu en ly en olled in a Doc o al P og am in
Communica ion Resea ch a he Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y.
Con ac : Facul ad de Comunicación, A da. Amé ico Vespucio, s/n, Se ille 41092, Spain.
E-mail: claudiaca[email p o ec ed]
h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0002-3415-4943
ABSTRACT
This esea ch o e s a c i ical pe spec i e on he news co e age by he Eu opean
Pa liamen ’s Vi ual P ess Room (VPR) o he e ugee issue du ing he Eu opean mig an c isis,
om 2015 o 2017. Recen social media esea ch has ocused on sys ema ising a heo e ical
app oach o Vi ual P ess Rooms (VPRs), bu he e is a ema kable lack o c i ical app oaches ha
link news p oduc ion o he ins i u ional ideologies ope a ing in he news indus y. A con en
analysis is conduc ed on he cha ac e is ics and one o news a icles published by he VPR,
ollowed by a compa ison wi h he Eu opean Union’s egula o y amewo k and ac ual esponse
o he issue. The esea ch e eals a posi i e ea men in news co e age o he e ugee issue, which
sugges s an imbalance be ween he EU’s ins i u ional news policy on e ugees and he weak and
ac u ed esponse o Eu opean o ganiza ions when aking ac ion on he issue.
KEY WORDS: Vi ual P ess Room, Eu opean Pa liamen , news, e ugees.
INTRODUCTION AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The echnosphe e c ea ed ou o he digi isa ion o he wo ld has no only a ec ed and
eshaped he hegemonic policies and models o domina ion (Cas ells 2010; McChesney 2014),
bu has also gi en ise o new p ac ices o poli icisa ion o in o ma ion ela ed o a ious social
issues, such as immig a ion. Al hough digi al ne wo ks and online news se ices in gene al ha e
been ein en ed o suppo ins i u ions in hese p ac ices, we will ocus ou a en ion on one
phenomenon in pa icula : he Vi ual P ess Room (he eina e , VPR), a hype media ool ha is
he descendan o he adi ional P ess O ice, bu now in cybe space.
This phenomenon is e y new and he e o e lacks a body o epis emological heo e ical
esea ch ha would suppo a scien i ic app oach o i . An ini ial e iew o he li e a u e e eals
he p edominance o an ins umen al, co po a e and inancial iew in s udies o VPRs. The ea ly
yea s o his cen u y saw he publica ion o he i s s udies, which highligh he implemen a ion
o hese ools on he websi es o a ious o ganisa ions. Almansa (2005), Cas illo Espa cia (2006),
Cas illo and Almansa (2005), Ga cía-O osa (2013), Moya Hinies a (2013), Ma ca F ancés, Ma illa
and Ma eos Rusillo (2014) and Du án ez-S olle (2017) ix hei a en ion on he connec ion o
public ela ions and in o ma ion managemen wi h he p ess h ough Communica ions O ices and
co po a e a eas. O he s, like Ruiz, Sala and Nobell (2010), Can alapied a, I u egui and González
(2012), Can alapied a, I u egui and Alzaga (2017), He e o-Gu ié ez e al. (2017) and Ma ínez
Fe o (2017), ocus on hype media mechanisms o c ea e a anspa en s a e o opinion wi h an
emphasis on ci ic ac ion. In La in Ame ica, s udies ocus on an epis emological heo e ical
analysis o he concep , and he p e ailing use o VPRs as news a chi es (Canelón-Sil a 2011;
Gabino and Méndez 2011). I is impo an o cla i y ha al hough ou s udy has d awn chie ly on
sou ces by Spanish and La in Ame ican au ho s, we ha e also e iewed some in e es ing s udies
in English dealing mainly wi h he p i a e sec o and, mo e speci ically, he co po a e wo ld
(Rebe and Kim 2006; Pe ig ew and Rebe 2010; Lee and Lin 2017).
Academic in e es in his a ea has cen ed mainly a ound he con lic o c i e ia ela ed o he
name, s uc u e and unc ions o VPRs, as well as hei inadequa e use as eposi o ies o con en
lacking in eal esou ces o manage in o ma ion lows o he public (Cas illo Espa cia 2006;
Wilcox, Came on and Xi a 2012). The e is also a no able numbe o quan i a i e s udies ocusing
on he p i a e sec o , whe e inancial and echnological condi ions ha e acili a ed a g ea e
de elopmen o he phenomenon. While bo h Cas illo Espa cia (2006) and Xi a (2011) o e clea
de ini ions o mos o he unc ions and gua an ees o VPRs, hei wo k shows signs o a
educ ionis iew ha p io i ises hei documen a y ole as in o ma ion subsidies. He e o-
Gu ié ez e al. (2017) ake a less ins umen alis iew o VPR ope a ions om he pe spec i e o
he anspa ency o he public and adminis a i e policies o democ a ic go e nmen s. These
au ho s poin o he weakening c edibili y o go e nmen ins i u ions in ela ion o in o ma ional
eedom and desc ibe Vi ual P ess Rooms as al e na i es o he managemen o anspa en
in o ma ion.
Based on his e iew o he li e a u e, i would seem ha a he heo e ical le el he e a e
po en ial aspec s o VPRs ha ha e no been explo ed in dep h in he s udies consul ed. Fi s o
all, he e is clea e idence ha co po a ions ha e he po en ial o unde mine he p inciples ha
limi he monopoly o in o ma ion held by mass media conglome a es. Ins i u ions need o be able
o cons uc hei own communica ion sys ems and models wi h hei audiences, as hei Vi ual
P ess Rooms can become channels o in o ma ion and con en lows wi h hei own c i e ia o
de e mining newswo hiness.
To explo e his ques ion o he news alues o Vi ual P ess Rooms, his s udy looks a how
hey ha e deal wi h one speci ic issue: he e ugee ques ion in he Eu opean Union. To his end,
i is necessa y o e e o s udies ha connec communica ion, he media and immig a ion as a
con ex o ou analysis. Resea ch analysing news on immig an s and e ugees includes s udies
ocusing on he s e eo yping o hese g oups om he pe spec i e o aming heo y applied o
news p oduc ion (Iga ua e al. 2014; Iga ua e . al. 2007; Iga ua, Muñiz and Cheng 2005), which
p o ide an academic ounda ion o ou analysis. Also o ele ance o his s udy a e con ibu ions
ha ha e used he concep o g aphic coding o highligh aspec s ela ed o human d ama and
solida i y (López del Ramo and Humanes 2016). Ca niel, O ega and Velázquez (2018) a gue ha
ega dless o how news ela ed o Medi e anean mig a ions is amed, all such s o ies sha e
common ea u es ha con ibu e o he no malisa ion o dominan discou ses on he issue. The
in e na ional li e a u e also includes au ho s who ha e s udied c iminalisa ion, nega i e images
and con o e sial aspec s in he media ha in luence public opinion on immig a ion (Leuda e al.
2008; P ui 2019). Simila ly, G eussing and Boomgaa den (2017) highligh a consis en ly
ambi alen po ayal o e ugees and asylum seeke s ha ames hem as ic ims, which also
con ibu es o a pejo a i e o nega i e depic ion o immig an s, also wi h associa ions o illegali y,
e o ism and c ime.
Howe e , o special in e es among all hese s udies is Choulia aki and S olic’s c i ical
analysis o news image y in i e Eu opean coun ies (G eece, Hunga y, I aly, I eland and he
Uni ed Kingdom) ela ed o he e ugee si ua ion om June o Decembe 2015. The s ance o hese
au ho s is in line wi h he iew aken in ou s udy, wi h hei asse ion o he social esponsibili y
associa ed wi h in o ma ional media ion, which is also applicable o he case o he EU Vi ual
P ess Rooms. As he au ho s sugges , ‘while, ine i ably, he space o appea ance (o news
image y) is a e sed by sys emic ela ionships o powe , so e eign and biopoli ical, i is impo an
ha we u n hese ela ionships in o a si e o s uggle, whe e he no ms o humani y, agency, and
esponsibili y a e cons an ly a s ake’ (Choulia aki and S olic 2017: 1174).
Ou s udy examines he VPR wi h a c i ical iew o how in o ma ion on immig a ion and
e ugees in he Eu opean Union is amed in i s news co e age. In e ms o i s s uc u e and
composi ion, he Eu opean Pa liamen ’s Vi ual P ess Room is one o he bes o ganised EU
agencies, wi h highly cen alised con en and a wide a ie y o news in o ma ion. On i s home
page, he VPR p esen s all he p ess eleases, memo anda, announcemen s and in e iews, as well
as o he news- ela ed documen s. I also includes an op ion o downloading news dossie s o he
mos ecen p ess con e ences, along wi h a pla o m o jou nalis s and media eams o apply o
acc edi a ion, as well as access o he Mul imedia Cen e o download a chi e pho og aphs, a ideo
lib a y and o he ins i u ional ma e ials. As his b ie analysis o i s s uc u e e eals, he VPR
o e s he unc ions o a eposi o y o news con en and a egula o o business-media/jou nalis -
ci izen in o ma ion lows. The app oach aken in his s udy has a desc ip i e componen , in ol ing
he iden i ica ion, measu emen and classi ica ion o a iables ela ed o he e ugee c isis, which
will be analysed in he co pus o news s o ies by means o a con en analysis. This is combined
wi h an in e p e a i e componen , whe eby he da a collec ed is associa ed wi h he poli ical and
legisla i e posi ion o he Eu opean Union and i s subsequen ac ion in p ac ice. Ou in en ion wi h
his combina ion o app oaches is o d aw in e ences om he con en in o de o demons a e a
co espondence be ween he aming o in o ma ion by he VPR and he legisla i e amewo k and
public discou se o he EU in ela ion o e ugee lows.
HYPOTHESIS AND METHODOLOGY
This s udy is concei ed as a esponse o he need o a c i ical app oach ha can help us o
iden i y he ins i u ional logic a wo k in he news p oduc ion o he Eu opean Pa liamen ’s VPR.
This means ela ing he explici con en p oduced by he VPR wi h he co po a e mechanisms o
in o ma ion p oduc ion ha ame news in keeping wi h he o ganisa ion’s in e es s. This a icle
hus p esen s a con en analysis o he news ou le s on he e ugee issue wi h a desc ip i e and
explana o y app oach which, h ough he use o ca ego ies and subca ego ies, compa es he
ea men o his issue by he Eu opean Pa liamen ’s VPR wi h he egula o y app oach o he
Eu opean Pa liamen o he ques ion.
The esea ch is based on he p emise o he ob ious co po a e unc ion o he Eu opean
Pa liamen ’s VPR, which, in i s in o ma ional con en and p oduc ion, legi imizes he Eu opean
Union’s ins i u ional discou se on e ugees. Howe e , he ocus o his s udy wi h i s c i ical
pe spec i e has led us o posi he ollowing hypo hesis:
H1. The Eu opean Pa liamen ’s VPR de elops a posi i e discou se consis en wi h i s e ugee
policy, which ne e heless con adic s he ac ion aken by he Eu opean Union on his issue.
The con i ma ion o e u a ion o his hypo hesis will se e o co obo a e he scien i ic
in e ence and e idence om he exis ing li e a u e on VPRs as me e eposi o ies o media con en
and as pa o he ambiguous discou se o he Eu opean Union. As wi h o he issues, such as he
concep o plu alism, whe he due o in e nal di e gences (Valcke 2012) o o s uc u al in e es s
(Qui ós 1998; Labio-Be nal 2014), nei he he Pa liamen no he Commission a e capable o
implemen ing a common immig a ion and asylum policy. The in o ma ion gene a ed by hese
bodies hus ends up becoming ye ano he example o a he o ic on human igh s wi hin he
Eu opean Union ha is no e lec ed in he ac ions ac ually aken in esponse o e ugees (Pé ez
González 2016: 472).

As a basic me hod, a con en analysis will be used wi h bo h quan i a i e and quali a i e
dimensions. Since he objec o s udy is he VPR aken as a whole, and gi en he wide a ie y o
i s con en , he ollowing c i e ia ha e been applied o he delimi a ion o ou co pus:
• Topic: ou o all he news s o ies published by he VPR, only hose ela ed o e ugee issues
a e conside ed. Fo he pu pose ul selec ion, he con en is segmen ed based on he
p esence o he key wo ds ‘immig a ion’ and ‘ e ugees’ in he i les o headlines o
publica ions.
• News gen e: ou o all he di e en ypes o in o ma ion published by he P ess O ice, he
s udy uni e se will be limi ed o news s o ies, p ess eleases and communiques on he
subjec o e ugees. This ype o con en has been selec ed because he exis ing li e a u e
on VPRs (Can alapied a, I u egui Ma da as and González 2012; Cas illo Espa cia 2006;
Ga cía-O osa 2013; Ruiz, Sala and Nobell 2010) has ound hem o be he mos common
o s anda dized.
• Time ame: news s o ies, communiques and p ess eleases published be ween Sep embe
2015 and No embe 2017 will be included. This ime ame has been chosen because
immig a ion and e ugee policy unde wen some d as ic uphea als a e he news o Alan
Ku di, he Sy ian child who was ound dead on a Tu kish beach in 2015. The impac on
public opinion caused by media co e age o his e en e ec i ely mobilised he EU o
change i s legisla i e app oach and eac ion o he e ugee c isis (Adle -Nissen, Ande sen
and Hansen 2020; Pa ke Nape and Goodman 2018; Hellmuelle and Zhang 2019). The
end da e chosen o he ime ame is based on an ins i u ional e en , as No embe 2017
ma ked he end o he i s wo-yea pe iod es ablished by he EU o he comple ion o he
e ugee ese lemen plan unde in e na ional p o ec ion ag eemen s. Mo eo e , on 16
No embe he EU Pa liamen ga e he g een ligh o he inal e o m o he Dublin
Regula ion and app o ed he Common Eu opean Asylum Sys em, wo documen s ha
we e in ended o egula e EU ac ions on he e ugee issue o he yea s ha ollowed, wi h
laws and pa ame e s qui e di e en om hose ha de ined he con ex o his s udy.
The applica ion o he il e s explained abo e o he s udy uni e se esul ed in a o al o 91
news a icles published be ween Sep embe 2015 and Decembe 2017, which cons i u es he en i e
co pus. Since he s udy co pus is su icien ly ep esen a i e and manageable o he esea ch, i is
aken in i s en i e y o he pu poses o he s udy. Gi en ha con en on he VPR is published a
andom in e als in esponse o e en s a any gi en momen , ou selec ion begins on 5 Sep embe
2015, a ound he ime ha he pic u es o Alan Ku di i s appea ed in he in e na ional p ess, and
ends in No embe 2017, as explained abo e. A o al o 27 publica ions we e ound om 2017, 48
om 2016, and six een om 2015 beginning on 5 Sep embe o ha yea , as men ioned abo e.
Fo he con en analysis, a coding sys em is needed ha can single ou ex ual uni s in he
o iginal ex ha a e seman ically ele an o he objec o esea ch. S udy ca ego ies a e used o
de e mine whe he he news is amed wi h a posi i e, nega i e o neu al one (Ba din 1986), and
he e o e whe he he news in o ma ion is in keeping wi h EU policy o no .
Fo he de ini ion o he ca ego ies and subca ego ies used in his s udy, we conside ed he
p inciples and p esupposi ions ela ed o immig a ion and asylum con ained in he explici
decla a ions o he 1951 Con en ion and P o ocol ela ed o he S a us o Re ugees, he Eu opean
Agenda on Mig a ion (2015), and he Dublin III Regula ion (2013). These ag eemen s se ou a
se ies o speci ic s anda ds o ac ion in ela ion o asylum, ecep ion, dis ibu ion and igh s o
e ugees ha se ed as he basis o he de elopmen o ou analy ical amewo k.
Bea ing in mind ha he issue o e ugees has been cha ac e ised as a p oblem issue in he
Eu opean Union, especially du ing he peak o he Medi e anean c isis (which was in u n
condi ioned by he si ua ions o wa and a med con lic s un olding in he sou ce coun ies o mos
o he mig an s), he ollowing se o ca ego ies was es ablished based on an analysis o he
a o emen ioned egula o y documen s:
1. Asylum. This ca ego y e e s o he main se o obliga o y ac ions s ipula ed by he
ag eemen s o he ea men o mig an s a i ing in he na ional e i o y o EU membe
s a es. Included wi hin his ca ego y a e he ollowing subca ego ies: Schengen A ea,
ex e nal bo de s, open bo de s, en y o immig an s, hos ing, poin s o access, e u n
policy, depo a ions, expulsion, mino s, eloca ion and ans e , na ional go e nmen s,
legal s a us and women.
2. Re ugee igh s. This ca ego y co e s he p inciples o p o ec ion and human igh s
applicable o e ugees once hey a e in an EU membe s a e. This includes he ollowing
subca ego ies: eedom o mo emen , esidence, in e na ional p o ec ion, iden i y
documen s, heal hca e, housing, employmen , social in eg a ion, educa ion, social
assis ance and access o cou s.
3. C isis. This ca ego y e e s o he p oblema ic conno a ions associa ed wi h he issue o
immig a ion in he Eu opean Union and i s di ec connec ion wi h wa s in coun ies in
A ica and he Middle Eas , as well as he wa e o displacemen s p o oked by hose
con lic s. The main subca ego ies o his ca ego y a e: e o ism, wa , i egula
immig a ion, dis ibu ion o e ugees, bo de c ossing, social issues, ejec ion, escue
ope a ions, sea ch and escue, dea hs a sea, e ugee camps, Eu opean Union, EU coun ies
(Uni ed Kingdom, Ge many, F ance, Spain, I aly, G eece, Mal a, Hunga y, Czech
Republic), and o he coun ies (Tu key).
A e an ini ial p oba i e analysis, we needed o accoun o implici exp essions o ca ego ies
beyond he explici e e ences o hem in he ex s o he co pus. In many cases his means using
o he linguis ic s a egies and synonymy o e e o he same ca ego ies shown in his able.
To con i m he scien i ic eliabili y o he ca ego ies o analysis, we conduc ed an in e - a e
eliabili y s udy in o de o de e mine he le el o ag eemen be ween he code s pa icipa ing in
he s udy (a o al o wo). Cohen’s kappa coe icien was used as a o mula, as i is ecommended
o s udies ha in ol e sys ems wi h mul iple ca ego ies, as was he case o his s udy.
Pi o kappa coe icien = PAo – PAe / 1 – PAe
whe e PAo is he p opo ion o ag eemen obse ed and PAe is he p opo ion o ag eemen
expec ed assuming independence be ween obse e s.
In ou esea ch, whe e bo h code 1 and code 2 analysed he same numbe o publica ions,
he esul o he coding is as ollows:
𝑘 = 0.9524 − 0.8389
1 − 0.8389
𝑘 = 0.7045
Acco ding o he a ing model p oposed by Landis and Koch (1977), any hing be ween 0.61
and 0.80 is conside ed a subs an ial deg ee o ag eemen , equi alen o a sco e o 5/6. I ou kappa
coe icien is 0.7045, his means ha he coding o he sys em o ca ego ies is subs an ial and ha
he e o e he s udy is eliable.
The esul s o he con en analysis we e also compa ed wi h he Eu opean Union’s egula o y
amewo k and policy on e ugees, immig a ion and asylum. To con i m ou ini ial assump ions
abou he ine ec i eness o he EU du ing he c isis, we ha e aken in o accoun a ame o
e e ence on asylum egula ions which, unde he T ea y o Lisbon (2009), p omo e he
ha monisa ion o s anda ds o bo de con ol and communi y managemen o asylum policy. We
also conside ed he p ecep s o he Dublin III Regula ion (2013), which es ablish he legal
p ocedu es o asylum p ocessing and in e na ional e ugee law. In he long e m, hese
amewo ks should ha e led o an in eg a ed app oach o mig a ion based on he p inciple o
solida i y o S a es. Ano he amewo k conside ed is he Eu opean Agenda on Mig a ion,
app o ed in May 2015, which called o an inc eased sea ch and escue capaci y in he
Medi e anean, he con ainmen o he massi e, uncon olled low o mig an s, and he opening up
o sa e, legal a enues o mig an en y in o he coun ies o he Eu opean Economic A ea, among
o he ini ia i es.
RESULTS
Below we discuss he mo e gene al esul s o he con en analysis, i s in quan i a i e e ms
and hen based on a quali a i e in e p e a ion, in iew o he c i ical and explana o y pe spec i e
o his s udy. We will a emp o co ela e hese esul s wi h he legisla i e and poli ical p inciples
con ained in he epo s and egula ions o he Eu opean Union, which we e s udied as p ima y
sou ces.
Fi s o all, i was ound ha o all he news a icles analysed, a posi i e one p edomina ed,
wi h 213 posi i e men ions ep esen ing 44 pe cen o he o al o 480 add essing he issue s udied
in i s h ee main ca ego ies. This suppo s ou ini ial assump ions, which sugges ed a a ou able
posi ion in ela ion o he in o ma ion and he managemen o i s mos u gen consequences by he
Eu opean Pa liamen , e en when s a is ics and esea ch p oduced la e demons a ed lag an
b eaches o he egula o y ag eemen s es ablished. Fo example, he Eu opean Pa liamen epo
i led E olu ion o he Numbe o Asylum Seeke s in he EU (2016) uses in og aphics o show ha
he EU coun ies ha ag eed o he Eu opean Agenda on Mig a ion in 2015 ha e ailed o ul il
he pledge o ecei e and ese le 20,000 e ugees pe yea . Mo eo e , in i s epo Global T ends:
Fo ced Displacemen in 2016 (2017), he UNHCR published s a is ics exposing he iola ion o
The e a e also no iceably low numbe s o e e ences o he opics ‘dea hs a sea’, ‘sea ch and
escue’ and ‘ escue ope a ions’, which collec i ely had a o al o only wo men ions. F om 2015
o 2017, he o al numbe o a ali ies in he Medi e anean c ossings o each sa e sho es was
14,652, acco ding o he IOM. Howe e , as e lec ed in he esul s o his s udy, he EU kep silen
on his issue, which again suppo s ou assump ion in ela ion o he exis ence o ce ain in en ions
o ame e en s in keeping wi h ins i u ional in e es s. Mo eo e , he EU le he esponsibili y o
he c isis in he hands o he na ional go e nmen s, which we e blamed o budge cu s and e usals
o wo k collabo a i ely.
The implemen a ion in Feb ua y 2016 o a mili a y ope a ion o suppo FRONTEX ( he
Eu opean Bo de and Coas Gua d Agency), in a join ini ia i e by G eece, Ge many and Tu key
o in e cep mig an s and e ugees in he Aegean Sea, was an ex eme measu e ha ma ked he
closu e o Balkan bo de s and he ailu e o he ese lemen mechanism. Howe e , his kind o
in o ma ion ecei ed no Pa liamen news co e age du ing ha pe iod o ime. This is due abo e
all o he ac ha he ein o cemen and ha dening o e u n policies and p ac ices, a om
con ibu ing o a sa e plan o legal en y, esul ed in mo e e ugees coming o Eu ope by sea, as
e lec ed in he IOM da a con ained in he CEAR epo , which indica es ha 92 pe cen o he
o al a i ed his way.
In ac , a news s o y published on 14 July 2014 asse ed ha ‘i egula immig a ion’, wi h a
nega i e aming (56 pe cen ) o immig an s, was placing huge p essu e on bo de au ho i ies and
ha he new Eu opean bo de agency would ha e o ein o ce join managemen o sea and land
ope a ions, especially in sensi i e si ua ions on he Medi e anean. Ne e heless, in he same
pe iod o he yea , acco ding o IOM epo s, a el by sea was he mos widely used op ion by
asylum seeke s o each Eu ope.
The e y ew men ions o opics like ‘ ejec ion’ (wi h jus ou men ions) and ‘social issues’
(in o ma ional silence), associa ed wi h he lack o solida i y exhibi ed by na ional go e nmen s,
once again e lec s a kind o dissemblance in ela ion o he phenomena ha we e o g a es
conce n o in e na ional opinion, especially in cases ela ed o no ions o bo de secu i y and
na ional de ence. Despi e he e idence o a dys unc ional policy o managemen o he c isis and
he accep ance and subsequen eloca ion o e ugees, he EU main ained a discou se in a ou o
ecei ing and admi ing mig an s leeing coun ies in con lic .

We will now o e an analysis o he beha iou o indi idual coun ies in e ms o hei
accep ance a es o asylum seeke s in ela ion o he numbe o appea ances in he news and he
one wi h which hey we e amed. The s a is ics ci ed he e we e aken om he EU Pa liamen
websi e, speci ically he in og aphic i led E olu ion o he numbe o asylum seeke s and e ugees
in he EU.
The i s case we will conside is he Uni ed Kingdom, a key coun y in he de elopmen o
he c isis and he subsequen poli ical consequences o i s depa u e om he EU. In 2015, some
38,800 people sough asylum, b inging he o al numbe o e ugees li ing in he coun y o
123,000. One yea la e , in 2016, he e was a o al o 38,750 claiman s, less han he p e ious yea ,
despi e he ac ha his was he wo s pe iod o he c isis, and he numbe o e ugee claiman s
who we e accep ed as e ugees was also lowe . As shown in he p e ious g aph, he Uni ed
Kingdom, a coun y ha openly adop ed conse a i e, Eu oscep ic posi ions o hal he EU’s
ecep ion o e ugees, had 100 pe cen neu al men ions in ou s udy,
Meanwhile, o Ge many a igu e o 476,510 asylum claiman s is gi en o 2015, wi h a o al
numbe o accep ed e ugees o 316,115. Al hough his igu e may seem con adic o y, in 2016
he e was a simila co ela ion, wi h a massi e inc ease in he numbe o claiman s, o 745,175,
while he o al numbe accep ed was 669,482. This implici ly sugges s ha close o 100,000 asylum
claims we e denied each yea by he Ge man go e nmen ; howe e , bo h he numbe o claims
ecei ed and he numbe accep ed we e ou imes highe han any o he EU coun y. In i s aming
in he news, ‘Ge many’ had 67 pe cen posi i e men ions and 33 pe cen neu al men ions.
G eece was he main ho spo o en y in o he Eu opean Union ia he Cen al Medi e anean
ou e. The s a is ics o his coun y e lec an unusually low numbe o e ugee and asylum claims,
wi h jus 13,000 claiman s in 2015 compa ed o 18,489 e ugees, while in 2016 he numbe g ew
o 51,110 claiman s. The si ua ion o his coun y is simila o ha o I aly; howe e , he gaps in
adminis a ion and documen a ion we e bigge due o he ma ked di e ence in he ac ions o he
au ho i ies on con inen al G eece compa ed o hose on he Aegean Islands, which means ha he
numbe o un egis e ed e ugees on Lesbos, Chios, Samos, Le os and Kos a e es ima ed o be
much highe . Wha is clea is ha he a emp s o uni y he will o EU membe s a es we e
insu icien o he e o m o he Common Eu opean Asylum Sys em and he adop ion o sho -
e m measu es, abo e all due o he esounding ailu e o he sys em o eloca ion based on
manda o y quo as. The EU’s ongoing dissemblance in he publica ions o he Eu opean
Pa liamen ’s P ess Room in ela ion o he e en s un olding on he G eek islands is e en clea e ,
as he one aken wi h espec o he ac ions o he G eek go e nmen is p edominan ly neu al (69
pe cen ).
The case o Tu key is wo hy o special men ion. The esul s o he con en analysis a e qui e
e ealing, as hey show ha his coun y had a p edominance o nega i e men ions, wi h 39 pe
cen o he o al. Al hough nego ia ions be ween he EU and Tu key p og essed owa ds he
p epa a ion o a 3,000 million eu o budge o manage he c isis wi h Tu key as a s a egic ansi
coun y, he ba ie s imposed by he go e nmen s on he Eu opean Council blocked he decisions
ha needed o be made o cen alised ac ion on immig a ion, especially due o he en y on o he
s age o o he poli ical in e es s. This was he case o he deba es abou ‘libe alising isas o
Tu kish ci izens who wan ed o a el o he EU, and s epping up nego ia ions o Tu key o en e
he EU’, which, acco ding o a VPR publica ion on 8 Ma ch 2016, was being used as a ba gaining
chip o slow down decision making.
In he case o Hunga y, he igu e o asylum claims in 2015 is s agge ing compa ed o he
numbe o e ugees accep ed in he coun y: 177,135 claiman s wi h jus 4,393 e ugees li ing in
he coun y. The si ua ion did no imp o e in 2016, wi h 29,430 claiman s and 4,748 accep ed
e ugees. This clea ly shows ha om one yea o he nex he numbe o e ugees inc eased by
only 300, which can be explained by he mass depo a ions and police ep ession deployed in he
coun y on i s bo de . Ne e heless, e en when he EU epo s made e e ence o he ense si ua ion
o he ‘Viseg ád G oup’ o coun ies, he men ions o ‘Hunga y’ a e neu al in 100 pe cen o
cases.
The epo s o he Eu opean Commission and CEAR help us o link he posi ioning o membe
s a es o ac o s ex e nal o immig a ion. These epo s indica e he p oli e a ion and elec o al
success o poli ical pa ies and he o ma ion o coali ions wi h an i-immig a ion discou ses, which
e ec i ely hal ed he de elopmen o a collabo a i e esponse ha was al eady being slowed down
as i was. Mo eo e , he e is also e idence o an eme ging end o c iminalisa ion o e ugees,
al hough in 2017 his discou se had no ye ully aken oo .
All o his e lec s a kind o hegemony o indi idual membe s a es o e he EU ins i u ions
ha s i ed o build a collabo a i e esponse o he c isis. The documen a y sou ces analysed
sugges ha 2016 was he mos ui less yea in ela ion o legisla i e e o m o he Common
Eu opean Asylum Sys em, which o a la ge ex en ell back on he p inciples o he Dublin III
Regula ion.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
As his s udy has shown, he e is a di e gence be ween he news s o ies published by he Eu opean
Pa liamen ’s Vi ual P ess Room and he e ec i e applica ion o ac ual policies in ela ion o he
e ugee issue. As he c isis con inues o a ec Eu ope, he deadlines o he de elopmen o he
necessa y e o ms seem o ge inc easingly blu y. The esul s desc ibed abo e shed ligh on he
EU’s ine ec i eness as a sup ana ional go e nmen in a eal con ex o supposedly sha ed
go e nance, gi en he ob ious asymme ies be ween membe s a es in ela ion o he ecep ion,
ese lemen and eloca ion o e ugees. The esul is he coexis ence in he poli ical amewo k
i sel ‘o na ional and EU compe encies, in a con ex o go e nmen ha is incomple e and
dys unc ional’ (Sanahuja 2016: 78). This e lec s he ma ked p esence o a p inciple o subsidia i y
whe eby he Eu opean bu den is dis ibu ed based on he poli ical will o indi idual coun ies, all
o which is e lec ed in a g owing spi al o dissemblance.
The e a e hus ob ious poli ical in e es s a play behind he dis inc ions made in he
e minology ela ed o e ugees, immig an s, and asylum seeke s, coinciding wi h he ise o igh -
wing poli ical pa ies in Eu ope and wi h he ea o immig a ion and i s possible consequences o
na ional economies. The ac s e ealed by his esea ch show ha any indi idual who a i es a
he EU’s land o sea bo de s om egions a wa o leeing pe secu ion is classi ied as a e ugee
acco ding o in e na ional law and as such should ecei e immedia e in e na ional p o ec ion.
Howe e , he lack o a speci ic ag eemen on he sha ed policies ha needed o be e o med
esul ed in he applica ion o dispa a e and a bi a y mechanisms o he ecep ion and dis ibu ion
o e ugees, a si ua ion ha he VPR does no men ion un il 2017.
Thus, in i s news co e age o e he wo-yea pe iod s udied, we can see how he Eu opean
Union applied a news aming s a egy whe eby, i s o all, i ca e ully managed he one o he
in o ma ion i published o e e o mo e sensi i e phenomena ha migh ha e gi en ise o
abe an in e p e a ions con a y o i s discou se, as in he case o ‘ ecep ion’, ‘en y o
immig an s’, ‘ eloca ion and ans e ’, and ‘bo de con ol’. In hese cases, i s i ed o main ain a
posi i e, upbea discou se on i s ole in he handling o he si ua ion and he sea ch o iable
solu ions o deal wi h i .
Secondly, i again applied he aming s a egy o he numbe o e e ences o issues ex e nal
o he EU’s ins i u ional esponsibili y as a way o main aining i s c edibili y; he e a e hus
equen , signi ican e e ences o ‘na ional go e nmen s’, he coun ies ha had he bigges
esponsibili y, like G eece and I aly, and ex e nal coun ies like Tu key. In hese cases, i chose o
al e na e be ween p edominan ly neu al and nega i e discou ses. Finally, he EU applies a kind
o silencing s a egy o opics ela ed o ‘ e ugee igh s’ and ‘social in eg a ion’, sugges ing a
s a egy o di e a en ion om an a ea whe e he policies a e no EU policies, and a e nei he
e ec i e no jus .
In sho , he mos signi ican indings o his esea ch can be summa ised in he ollowing
e ms:
1. Bo h in he EU Pa liamen sessions epo ed in he news a icles and in he summi s and
councils o MEPs, he e a e clea di e gences be ween de eloping a common asylum policy and
lea ing he amewo ks o ac ion in he hands o na ional go e nmen s. This double agenda
ul ima ely had he e ec o unde mining he Eu opean Union as a supposed sup ana ional
go e nmen and i s capaci y o coo dina e an e ec i e join esponse o he c isis, and p o oked a
chain e ec ha had d as ic epe cussions on he p ocesses o ‘en y o immig an s’, ‘ ecep ion’,
and ‘ eloca ion and ans e ’, as well as asylum policy e o m.
2. The news con en is cha ac e ised by a p edominan ly posi i e o neu al discou se, as well
as he calls o solida i y, ‘humani a ian aid’ and he sa egua ding o ‘human igh s’. Howe e , a
he same ime, he EU Pa liamen , Commission and Council all published epo s and p oposals
o e o ming he Common Eu opean Asylum Sys em ha su ep i iously p omo ed ha dening
bo de con ols, limi ing a i als om ou side he EU, closing he open ou es o he Schengen
A ea o es ic he mo emen o e ugees, and implemen ing e ec i e legal mechanisms o
e u ning e ugees o hei coun ies o o igin. This e eals wo con adic o y discou ses, one
decla ed publicly and he o he adop ed in in e nal epo s.
3. The e is an e iden a emp o o e look he s a is ics on he negligen conduc o he EU
and e en o na ional go e nmen s in he ecep ion o e ugees, especially in si ua ions in ol ing
a i als ia dange ous ou es like he Medi e anean and Aegean seas. This is e en he case a he
end o 2016, a momen alling wi hin he s udy pe iod, when he numbe s o dea hs a sea eached
hei peak o mo e han 5,000. This si ua ion o in o ma ional silence suppo s ou explana ion o
he exis ence o news ames o p esen each ca ego y sepa a ely, and o a oid p o iding he
use / eade wi h su icien ools o connec ce ain si ua ions wi h o he s and iden i y he
ins i u ional ideologies p esen in he in o ma ion.
4. The e a e asymme ies in he dis ibu ion o he mig a o y bu den among membe s a es
and he aming ha hose s a es ecei ed in he discou se o he Eu opean Pa liamen . This e lec s
a s a egy o di e public a en ion owa ds he e o s o he EU o nego ia e a join s a egy wi h
membe s a es and he a emp s o each ou o non-EU coun ies like Tu key o Lebanon.
Meanwhile, bo de con ol ope a ions, police ep ession on ex e nal bo de s, de icien
adminis a ion a e ugee cen es, mass depo a ions o e ugees unde unjus o illegal condi ions
and he ailu e o he eloca ion and ans e plan based on manda o y quo as all occupied less han
10 pe cen o he o al numbe o news a icles.
5. In iew o he di e gences o membe s a es which, as he con en analysis shows, had no
in en ion o adhe ing o he Dublin Regula ion o he sys em o ese lemen s p oposed by he
Commission in 2015, he EU sough o ex e nalize he c isis in he con ex o nego ia ions wi h
Tu key and Lebanon and he capaci y o hese coun ies o con ain he low o immig an s a i ing
a hei bo de s and o accep depo ees. On he one hand, he EU ecognised he cen ali y o
Tu key as he main ecei ing coun y o immig an s, and his is e lec ed in i s discou se, wi h
high pe cen ages o posi i e and neu al men ions; bu on he o he , i c i icises he posi ion aken
by Tu key and i s a emp o nego ia e i s en y in o he EU using he mig a ion c isis as a
ba gaining chip.
In iew o he abo e, we would sugges ha he EU ‘shapes opinions on he in o ma ion’
(Giménez A men ia 2006: 57) by delibe a ely using news ames o es ablish a con ex o he
eali y p esen ed and hough pa e ns inco po a ed in o he ex e nal objec i e da a (Sebas ían de
E ice 1994 ci ed in Giménez A men ia 2006: 7).
The esul s o his analysis sugges ha he discou se o he Vi ual P ess Room is
p edominan ly posi i e on he opic o e ugees and he EU’s esponse o he issue. Howe e , he e
is an e iden con adic ion be ween he news co e age o he opics o asylum, c isis and igh s,
and he ope a ional esponse o he Eu opean Union on he g ound in he yea s co e ed by he
s udy, which e ec i ely con i ms ou ini ial hypo hesis. This c i ical analysis hus demons a es
he exis ence o a spi al o dissemblance in ela ion o co e age o he e ugee issue by he
Eu opean Pa liamen VPR, ein o cing co po a e, adminis a i e and quan i a i e dynamics. As a
u u e line o esea ch, we belie e i would be wo h explo ing whe he he communica i e logic

desc ibed he e in ela ion o he Eu opean Pa liamen ex ends o o he ins i u ions in he sec o , in
a con ex whe e he e is a wide gap be ween in o ma ional discou se and poli ical ac ion. To his
end, we belie e his s udy could be complemen ed wi h in e iews and ocus g oups wi h EU
jou nalis s who wo k o VPRs. I would hus also be aluable o ob ain in o ma ion on jou nalis ic
ou ines, ins i u ional il e s and sou ces o in o ma ion on he e ugee issue.
REFERENCES
Adle -Nissen, R., Ande sen, K.E. and Hansen, L. (2020), ‘Images, emo ions, and in e na ional
poli ics: he dea h o Alan Ku di’, Re iew o In e na ional S udies, 46, pp. 75–95.
Almansa, A. (2005), ‘Relaciones Públicas y Gabine es de Comunicación’ (‘Public Rela ions and
Communica in O ice’), Anàlisi: Quade ns de Comunicació i Cul u a, 32, pp. 117–132.
Ba din, L. (1986), Análisis de Con enido (‘Con en Analysis’), Mad id: Akal Uni e si a ia.
Canelón-Sil a, A. R. (2011), ‘Diplomacia Pública 2.0’ (‘Public Diplomacy 2.0’), in A. B.
Fe nández Sou o and F. Ga cía Ga cía (eds), P oceedings o he VI In e na ional Cong ess o
Resea ch in Public Rela ions, Pon e ed a, Spain, 5-6 May, Mad id: ICONO14, pp. 444-476.
Can alapied a, M. J., I u egui, L. and de Alzaga, P. (2017), ‘La con e gencia hipe media en la
comunicación co po a i a’ (Hype media con e gence in co po a e communica ion’),
Alcance, Re is a Cubana de In o mación y Comunicación, 6:14, pp. 124-135.
Can alapied a, M.J., I u egui Ma da as, L. and González, D. G. (2012), ‘La comunicación en e
gabine es y pe iodis as a a és de la web 2.0: El caso de MeneX a.com’ (‘Communica ion
be ween cabine s and jou nalis s h ough he web 2.0: he case o meneX a.com’), Es udios
Sob e El Mensaje Pe iodís ico, 18, pp. 213–222.
Ca niel, R., O ega, E. and Velázquez, T. (2018), ‘El a amien o de la in o mación sob e lujos
mig a o ios en los medios de los países medi e áneos’ (‘The ea men o he in o ma ion
abou mig a ion lows on Medi e anean coun ies’ media’), adComunica, 16, pp. 159–178.
Cas ells, M. (2010), Comunicación y pode (‘Communica ion and Powe ’), Mad id: Alianza
Edi o ial.
Cas illo Espa cia, A. (2006), ‘Public ela ions and p ess oom. Análisis de las salas de p ensa
i uales de las g andes emp esas de España’ (‘Public ela ions and p ess oom: Analysis o
Online P ess Room o Spain IBEX 35 Co po a ions’), Razón y Palab a, 49:74. Re ie ed om
h ps://dialne .uni ioja.es/se le /a iculo?codigo=2161431
Cas illo, A. and Almansa, A. (2005), ‘Relaciones públicas y Tecnologías de la Comunicación.
Análisis de los si ios de p ensa i uales’ (‘Public Rela ions and Communica ion
Technologies. Analysis o Online P ess Rooms’), O ganicom, 3, pp. 133-149.
CEAR (2017), ‘Hacia dónde a el nue o Sis ema Eu opeo Común De Asilo (SECA)’ (‘Whe e is
he new common Eu opean asylum sys em going (SECA), 21 Feb ua y,
h ps://www.cea .es/hacia-donde- a-el-nue o-sis ema-eu opeo-comun-de-asilo-seca/
Choula iaki, L. and S olic, T. (2017), ‘Re hinking media esponsibili y in he e ugee ‘c isis’: a
isual ypology o Eu opean news’, Media, Cul u e and Socie y, 39:8, pp. 1162–1177.
Du án ez-S olle, P. (2017), ‘In e acciones y pa icipación en salas de p ensa de las compañías del
IBEX35’ (‘In e ac i e and pa icipa o y elemen s in he i ual p ess ooms o IBEX 35
companies’), El p o esional de la in o mación, 26:2, pp. 228-237.
Eu opean Commission (2015), Comunicación de la Comisión al Pa lamen o Eu opeo, al Consejo,
al Comi é Económico y Social Eu opeo y al Comi é de las Regiones. Una agenda Eu opea de
Mig ación, (‘Communica ion om he Commission o he Eu opean Pa liamen , o Council,
he Eu opean Economic and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he Regions. A Eu opean
Mig a ion Agenda’), B ussels: EC, h ps://eu -lex.eu opa.eu/legal-
con en /ES/TXT/PDF/?u i=CELEX:52015DC0240& om=HU
Eu opean Pa liamen (2016), Re ugees: social inclusion and in eg a ion in o he labou ma ke ,
B ussels: EP, h p://www.eu opa l.eu opa.eu/doceo/documen /TA-8-2016-0297_EN.pd
Eu opean Pa liamen (2019), ‘E olu ion o he numbe o asylum seeke s and e ugees in he
Eu opean Union’, Asylum and mig a ion in he EU,
h ps://www.eu opa l.eu opa.eu/in og aphic/welcoming-eu ope/index_en.h ml# il e =2019
Eu opean Pa liamen a y Resea ch Se ice (EPRS) (2019), The Mig a ion Issue, B ie ing EU
Policies- Deli e ing o ci izens, B ussels: EPRS,
h ps://www.eu opa l.eu opa.eu/RegDa a/e udes/BRIE/2019/635542/EPRS_BRI(2019)6355
42_EN.pd
Eu opean Union (2013), Reglamen o de Dublín. Reglamen o (UE) No 604/2013 del Pa lamen o
Eu opeo y del Consejo. (‘Dublin Regula ion. Regula ion (EU) N 604/2013, om he Eu opean
Pa liamen and Council’), h ps://eu -lex.eu opa.eu/legal-
con en /ES/TXT/HTML/?u i=CELEX:32013R0604&qid=1442190373681& om=ES
Gabino Campos, M.A. and Méndez O iz, A.I. (2011), ‘Ace camien o a las Salas de P ensa 2.0 de
los o ganismos gube namen ales mexicanos’ (‘App oach o P ess Rooms 2.0 o Mexican
go e nmen agencies,’) in C. Ma eos Ma ín, A. I. A dè ol Ab eu and S. Toledano Buendía
(eds), La comunicación pública secues ada po el me cado (‘Public communica ion,
hijacked by he ma ke ’), P oceedings o he III In e na ional Cong ess La ina de
Comunicación, La Laguna, Spain, Decembe 2011, La Laguna: Sociedad La ina de
Comunicación Social,
h p://www. e is ala inacs.o g/11SLCS/ac as_2011_IIICILCS/162_Gabino.pd
Ga cía O osa, B. (2013), ‘Los gabine es de comunicación online de las emp esas del IBEX 35’
(‘Online Communica ion Cabine s o IBEX 35 Companies’), His o ia y Comunicación Social,
18, pp. 295-306.
Giménez A men ia, P. (2006), ‘Una nue a isión del p oceso comunica i o: La eo ía del En oque
(F aming)’ (‘A new ision o comunica i e p ocess: F aming Theo y’), Re is a de
Comunicación y Homb e, 2:9, pp. 55–66.
G eussing, E. and Boomgaa den, H. (2017). ‘Shi ing he e ugee na a i e? An au oma ed ame
analysis o Eu ope’s 2015 e ugee c isis’, Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies, 43:11, pp.
1749–1774.
Hellmuelle , L. and Zhang, X. (2019), ‘Shi ing owa d a humanized pe spec i e? Visual aming
analysis o he co e age o e ugees on CNN and Spiegel Online be o e and a e he iconic
pho o publica ion o Alan Ku di’, Visual Communica ion, Vol. 0:0, pp. 1–24.
He e o-Gu ié ez, F.-J., Ma ínez-Vall ey, F., Tapia-F ade, A., Rey-Ga cía, P. and Cabezuelo-
Lo enzo, F. (2017), ‘T anspa encia en el sec o público a a és de las salas de p ensa online.
Ges ión de ecu sos colec i os y su in o mación en webs municipales’ (‘Public sec o
anspa ency h ough online p ess ooms. Managemen o collec i e esou ces and
in o ma ion on ci y websi es’), El P o esional de La In o mación, 26:3, pp. 421-429.
Iga ua Pe osanz, J.J., Muñiz Mu iel, C., O e o Pa a, J.A. and de la Fuen e Juan, M. (2007), ‘El
a amien o in o ma i o de la inmig ación en los medios de comunicación españoles. Un
análisis de con enido desde la Teo ía del F aming’ (‘In o ma i e ea men o inmig ación
en Spanish Media. A con en analysis om F aming Theo y’), Es udios sob e el Mensaje
Pe iodís ico, 13, pp. 91-110.
Iga ua, J.J., Ba ios, I.M., O ega, F. and F u os, F. J. (2014), ´The Image o Immig a ion in Fic ion
B oadcas on P ime- ime Tele ision in Spain’, Palab a Cla e, 17:3, pp. 589-618.
Iga ua, J.J., Muñiz, C. and Cheng, L. (2005), ‘La inmig ación en la p ensa española. Apo aciones
empí icas y me odológicas desde la eo ía del encuad e no icioso’ (‘Inmig a ion in Spanish
P ess. Empi ical and me hodological con ibu ions o m news F aming Theo y’),
Mig aciones, 17, pp. 143-181.
Labio-Be nal, A. (2014). ‘El e e no deba e sob e la concen ación mediá ica en la Unión Eu opea.
Del plan Reding-Walls öm a la Inicia i a Ciudadana po el plu alismo’ (‘The long deba e
abou media concen a ion in he Eu opean Union. F om Reding-Walls öm Plan o Ci il
Plu alism P oposal’), in M. Chapa o (ed.), Medios de p oximidad: Pa icipación Social y
Polí icas Públicas (‘Media o p oximi y: Social pa icipa ion and public policies’),
Gi ona/Málaga: Ed. Luces de Gálibo, pp. 55-72.
Landis, J. R. and Koch, G. G. (1977), ‘The measu emen o obse e ag eemen o ca ego ical
da a’, Biome ics, 33:1, pp. 159-174.
Lee, S. T. and Lin, J. (2017), ‘An in eg a ed app oach o public diplomacy and public ela ions: A
i e-yea analysis o he in o ma ion subsidies o he Uni ed S a es, China, and Singapo e’,
In e na ional Jou nal o S a egic Communica ion, 11:1, pp. 1-17.
Leuda , Y., Hayes, J., Nek apil, J. and Bake , J. T. (2008), ‘Hos ili y hemes in media, communi y
and e ugee na a i es’, Discou se and Socie y, 19:2, pp. 187–221.
López del Ramo, J. and Humanes, M.L. (2016), ‘Análisis de con enido de la ep esen ación
o og á ica de la c isis de los e ugiados si ios y su incidencia en el aming isual’
(‘Con en analysis o he pho og aphic ep esen a ions o he Sy ian e ugee c isis and hei
isual aming impac ’), Sci e, 22, pp. 87-97.
Ma ca F ancés, G., Ma illa, K. and Ma eos Rusillo, S. M. (2014), ‘Museos y pe iodis as. Análisis
de la sala de p ensa i ual como espacio de elaciones públicas’ (‘Museums and jou nalis s.
Analysis o he i ual p ess oom as a public ela ions space’), His o ia y Comunicación
Social, 19, pp. 105-115.
Ma ínez Fe o, V. (2017), ‘Libe ad de exp esión y segu idad: Un análisis del discu so
pe iodís ico sob e inmig ación’ (‘F eedom o he p ess and secu i y: An analysis o he
jou nalis discou se abou immig a ion eedom’), Ba a a ia. Re is a Cas ellano-Manchega
de Ciencias, 23, pp. 87–102.