Lesson video

Hi, I'm Mrs. Allchin, and I'm going to be taking you through this Citizenship lesson today.

I'm going to give you all the information that you need to be successful, and I'm also going to pause and tell you when to complete a check for understanding or a task.

Hope you enjoy the lesson.

This lesson is called "What does the media have to do with immigration?" And it's taken from the unit of lessons, Synopticity: How do different ideas and concepts in Citizenship interconnect? By the end of this lesson, you'll be able to explain how the relationship between the media and immigration can be both positive and negative.

Our keywords for today are: media, which is the different ways we share and receive information on a large scale; immigration, which is the process of people moving from one country to another to live and work; and influence, the power to affect or change someone's thoughts, actions, or decisions.

Our lesson outline for "What does the media have to do with immigration?" is first we're going to look at how has the media been an advocate for immigrants and then we're going to consider how has the media portrayed immigrants negatively.

So let's begin by thinking about how has the media been advocate for immigrants? So Sofia's asking, "What is the relationship between the media and immigration?" Pause and have a think about that for yourselves.

The media plays a powerful role in shaping citizens' opinions about immigration.

It can influence how immigrants and immigration policies are received by the way it reports stories, uses language, and selects images.

The relationship can be both positive and negative, and we're going to explore that during this lesson.

So Sofia is now asking, "How has the media been an advocate for immigration?" Because that's what we're looking at first.

So pause and have a think about that question.

The media has been a positive advocate for immigration by: highlighting the positive contributions that immigrants have made to society, promoting human rights and galvanising public response, and also by challenging stereotypes.

The media can sometimes actively promote the many ways in which immigrants have made a positive contribution to society.

And we saw this during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Immigrants played an important role across a range of health sectors, often on the frontline, working to look after the sick and vulnerable and making up 1/6 of NHS staff.

And BBC News highlighted how the NHS relied on migrant workers during COVID-19, as well as exploring how the international knowledge they bring to healthcare is so important.

So a really, really clear example there of the media highlighting the really important work that migrants do, particularly when it was COVID-19 and the pandemic.

Let's have a check for understanding.

How did immigrants play an important role during the COVID-19 pandemic? They worked across a range of health sectors, often on the frontline, working to look after the sick and vulnerable and making up 1/6 of NHS staff.

Some media outlets have also created specialist forums in which the United Kingdom's diverse and rich communities can be celebrated and shared.

This creates a visible celebration of multiculturalism and has a positive influence on people's opinions of diversity.

For example, the BBC Asian Network champions contemporary British Asian and popular South Asian music and culture.

Their news content also promotes rich debate, highlighting issues which matter to their diverse audience.

And BBC Radio 1Xtra also focuses on celebrating and exploring Black British identity.

One Day Without Us is a campaign that aims to highlight the positive influence that immigrants have on UK society and to also demonstrate the negative influence that their absence on various aspects of life would have.

One Day Without Us encourages the sharing of personal stories, experiences, and cultural contributions of immigrants.

So giving it that real personal aspect as well, which is really important.

The campaign is supported by various organisations, including media outlets.

For example, in 2017, The Guardian ran a piece entitled "Migrants Have Helped Make Britain.

It's Time to Celebrate Us," which celebrated the vast contributions that immigration has made to the UK.

The media can also promote the human rights of immigrants and galvanise a public response.

So that means to really get people involved and wanting to do something to help.

The media helped to amplify the Windrush scandal in 2018, exposing how citizens from Caribbean backgrounds were wrongly detained or deported.

Persistent coverage led to a public apology from the government as well as policy changes.

They also reported on the poor conditions of detention centres, such as Yarl's Wood, being used to hold immigrants, causing public discussion.

Let's have a check for understanding.

State what the media reporting of the Windrush scandal led to.

Persistent coverage led to a public apology from the government and policy changes.

In 2015, during the ongoing Syrian war, Syrian citizens were fleeing their homes to seek asylum.

One family made the dangerous trip by boat from Turkey to Kos.

During this crossing, the mother and two young boys died.

The image of the body of one of the boys pictured on the beach was shown by a number of media outlets.

This harrowing image humanised the refugee crisis for many and led to increased donations to refugee charities, showing the importance of media advocacy.

The media has also played a role in breaking down stereotypes in relation to immigration.

Following the call out for citizens to host Ukrainian refugees in 2022, many media outlets printed positive stories where British people discussed the mutual benefits of hosting refugees and the positive influence that the refugees were having in their community.

This gave a lived counter argument to stereotypical viewpoints regarding refugees as problematic, because actually lots of citizens were talking about how they personally really benefited from this project.

The media have also produced documentaries on the topic of migration, allowing audiences to hear balanced information about the impact of immigration, supporting critical thinking, which is really important to have that really balanced views on things happening in our society.

These have included a documentary, "Panorama: Am I British?", which featured young people born or brought up in the UK, who expressed feeling that immigration policy treats them as second-class citizens.

Documentaries that allow a range of people to share their lived experiences may help to break down barriers and dispel hostile opinions regarding migration.

The relationship between the media and immigration can be positive, with the media advocating for the rights of migrants.

These thought-provoking stories and images can impact how citizens perceive the issue, leading to a change in opinion towards the complex and emotive topic of immigration.

Let's have a check for understanding.

What are the missing words? The relationship between the media and immigration can be something with the media, something for the rights of migrants.

These thought-provoking stories and images can impact how citizens something the issue, leading to a change in opinion towards the complex and emotive topic of immigration.

So pause and try and work out what are the missing words.

Let's see how you got on.

So we had positive, advocating, and perceive.

For Task A, I'd like you to explain the positive relationship between the media and immigration by describing the ways in which the UK media has advocated for immigrants.

When explaining the positive relationship between the UK media and immigration, you may have included: the media has sometimes helped people understand the struggles of immigrants and refugees by showing their stories in a positive and human way.

This can make the public more caring and supportive of immigration.

One example is the coverage of Ukrainian refugees in 2022.

Some media showed how British families were welcoming them into their homes and the relationships being formed, which helped people to see refugees in a more positive light.

You may have also included: another important example is the photo of a Syrian boy who died while trying to cross the sea with his family in 2015.

His picture was shown on the front pages of UK newspapers and helped people realise how dangerous life is for refugees.

After that, more people donated to refugee charities and wanted the government to do more to help them.

Also, documentaries and news reports have helped break down stereotypes about immigrants, for example, by highlighting the immigrants who supported the NHS during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This reinforces that immigrants are not a problem and actually make a significant contribution to the UK.

So we've had a look at how has the media been an advocate for immigrants.

We're now going to look at how has the media portrayed immigrants negatively? So Sofia's asking, "Is the relationship between the media and immigration always positive?" So pause and reflect on that question for a while.

Some media outlets portray immigration in a positive light, highlighting the cultural and economic contributions of immigrants.

However, other outlets have been accused of using antagonistic or derogatory language and imagery when covering immigration issues.

This kind of negative portrayal can really shape public opinion and contribute to more hostile attitudes towards immigrants.

The language that newspapers use to describe immigrants can cause fear and create hostile opinions towards immigrants.

For example, in 2015, the Daily Mail ran a headline that used language comparing migrants to destructive, swarming insects.

This kind of wording dehumanised immigrants and made them seem like a threat or an invasion.

This type of language may influence citizens to perceive immigration negatively and view immigrants as a threat.

State how the Daily Mail running a headline that used language comparing migrants to destructive, swarming insects could cause citizens to perceive immigration negatively.

So pause and have a think about this check for understanding.

So this sort of language is dehumanising and it associates immigrants with negative acts such as invasion and destruction.

In 2015, The Sun printed an article claiming that one in five British Muslims had sympathy for ISIS, based on a poll conducted after the Paris terror attacks.

However, they were later ordered by the Independent Press Standards Organisation, IPSO, to admit that the story was significantly misleading.

IPSO found that The Sun misrepresented the poll results by confusing sympathy for people travelling to Syria with support for ISIS fighters or their actions.

So two very different things.

The newspaper was ordered to publish a correction.

So Sofia's asking, "What could the impact of this have been?" So what could that impact of The Sun printing that headline have been? Words can stick, and once read are not easily forgotten.

So although The Sun printed a retraction where they had to ultimately say sorry, this might not have been read by everyone.

It might not have been noticed by everyone who did read the initial misleading report, so it can still be really, really negative.

This report also followed a terrorist attack, so emotions would've been running high for many citizens, meaning the deceptive headline may have caused strong feelings of anger and fear.

During the EU referendum campaign in 2016, the UK Independence Party, UKIP, produced a poster titled "Breaking Point." This showed a long queue of non-white migrants and suggested that the UK was being overwhelmed by immigration.

This poster was shown in various newspapers and could be viewed as misleading, as many of the people in the photo were not coming to Britain at all.

The image and the way it was reported may have created fear about uncontrolled immigration, jobs, and housing, without real evidence, negatively influencing public opinion about immigration.

Let's have a check for understanding.

What did the "Breaking Point" poster show and what did it suggest? It showed a long queue of non-white migrants and incorrectly suggested the UK was being overwhelmed by immigration.

The relationship between the media and immigration can be negative, with the media using negative language and imagery when referring to immigration and the impact on the UK.

This can lead to a negative and fearful opinion towards the complex and emotive topic of immigration.

Let's have a check for understanding.

What emotions might negative reporting of immigration cause? A; serenity; B, fear; C, awe; D, anger.

So negative reporting of immigration could cause fear and anger.

Task B, what I would like you to do is look at this statement, which is, "The media can only ever be a force for good when reporting on immigration." So the media can only ever be fantastic, a force for good, brilliant when reporting on immigration.

I'd like you to explain why some people might disagree with this statement using examples learned this lesson.

So pause while you have a go at Task B.

So when explaining why people may disagree with the statement, you might have included: some people may disagree with this statement because the media can sometimes spread fear, stereotypes, or false information.

For example, The Sun printed an article claiming that one in five British Muslims had sympathy for ISIS, which IPSO later forced them to retract due to inaccuracy.

This kind of reporting can make people scared or angry at immigrant communities, which can cause tension.

You may have continued: During the EU referendum, UKIP's "Breaking Point" poster, which was printed in lots of newspapers, depicted a queue of non-white migrants.

The campaign implied that the UK was being flooded with immigrants.

This made some people believe immigration was out of control.

These examples show how the media can sometimes make immigration look negative and dangerous, which can lead to racism, discrimination, and division.

In summary of the lesson, "What does the media have to do with immigration?", there is a clear relationship between the media and immigration, particularly in how it can impact public perception of the issue.

The media can be a positive advocate for immigration by highlighting the positive contributions that immigrants have made to society, promoting human rights and galvanising a public response, and challenging stereotypes.

However, antagonistic or misleading reporting of immigration by the media could also lead to feelings of anger and fear.

That brings us to the end of this lesson.

Well done for working hard, and I hope that you'll come back for more Citizenship lessons in the future.