<%BANNER%>

A Qualitative Frame Analysis of Illegal Immigration in Two British Newspapers

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021219/00001

Material Information

Title: A Qualitative Frame Analysis of Illegal Immigration in Two British Newspapers
Physical Description: 1 online resource (52 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Niles, Beau W
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Sociology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sociology thesis, M.A.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Illegal immigration into Britain has become a rallying cry for nationalistic political parties. Newspaper articles have been shown to influence the salience of political issues, and thus it is important to look at how illegal immigration is framed and for the purposes of this paper two British newspapers were used: The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph. For this paper 212 articles were examined, 108 from The Guardian and 104 from The Daily Telegraph. These newspapers represent two different political viewpoints, The Guardian being the more liberal newspaper, and The Daily Telegraph being more conservative. Each of these newspapers framed both legal and illegal immigration in different ways. Frame analysis was used to look at the messages these newspapers were sending their readers. The Guardian typically framed illegal and legal immigration in a more positive light, and The Daily Telegraph typically framed illegal and legal immigration more negatively. The articles were coded based on the framing in which illegal immigration was presented. The specific frames found in the articles consisted of the following: ID cards, United States illegal immigration, tragedy, racism, law and order, articles about other countries, exploitation, temporary workers, and amnesty.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Beau W Niles.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Shehan, Constance L.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021219:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021219/00001

Material Information

Title: A Qualitative Frame Analysis of Illegal Immigration in Two British Newspapers
Physical Description: 1 online resource (52 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Niles, Beau W
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Sociology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sociology thesis, M.A.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Illegal immigration into Britain has become a rallying cry for nationalistic political parties. Newspaper articles have been shown to influence the salience of political issues, and thus it is important to look at how illegal immigration is framed and for the purposes of this paper two British newspapers were used: The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph. For this paper 212 articles were examined, 108 from The Guardian and 104 from The Daily Telegraph. These newspapers represent two different political viewpoints, The Guardian being the more liberal newspaper, and The Daily Telegraph being more conservative. Each of these newspapers framed both legal and illegal immigration in different ways. Frame analysis was used to look at the messages these newspapers were sending their readers. The Guardian typically framed illegal and legal immigration in a more positive light, and The Daily Telegraph typically framed illegal and legal immigration more negatively. The articles were coded based on the framing in which illegal immigration was presented. The specific frames found in the articles consisted of the following: ID cards, United States illegal immigration, tragedy, racism, law and order, articles about other countries, exploitation, temporary workers, and amnesty.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Beau W Niles.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Shehan, Constance L.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021219:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101206_AAAAFO INGEST_TIME 2010-12-07T03:14:54Z PACKAGE UFE0021219_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 1053954 DFID F20101206_AADEVF ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH niles_b_Page_13.tif GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
c501e0421f1452b8b0413ca4b7a9dfd4
SHA-1
fbfd0a8782cc594d7f07a23dc4cc8a6133bb8562
192882 F20101206_AADFCD niles_b.pdf
767ad19402dd1d902ff659456bcb13f5
2be1a722d485569c073c57d7909612dbe2b67dfd
35078 F20101206_AADEVG niles_b_Page_48.QC.jpg
9e65a26ed6afa2ee6fd3f47d95f7b8bc
16ac0667c4de94feef580af21cf4f7a55b9d407b
34374 F20101206_AADFCE niles_b_Page_37.QC.jpg
361d100878e8f41dfe1b2ffe160b6c73
e725e6cedaae4e1e92e8c82ae471f5b3d92fe202
119989 F20101206_AADEVH niles_b_Page_17.jp2
258aa059f14bbfa052beef3129634df0
0bc096ae730d2dd5207189e1e815d7dfe55213fd
35552 F20101206_AADFCF niles_b_Page_26.QC.jpg
c705d0372f6414df36d1e247c49cf658
ef279548f119d3ad04b7d8f55b4f75484bce062d
35824 F20101206_AADEVI niles_b_Page_19.QC.jpg
7933320d0caca34ca71bac8f76ebc9d6
0d5a00aa9c94e5aaf8192eb9bd3551a3c2c9ae1c
8884 F20101206_AADFCG niles_b_Page_13thm.jpg
ccfc367fd6656eee20d83dfbfadcf57f
8ec8a3d068e4e4e37826368af953a1d7bf0bcc31
38221 F20101206_AADFCH niles_b_Page_10.QC.jpg
c5b3d3025a46280462c201459897d2e1
e8c1f2634de22cd948794901935e7e16af442226
5708 F20101206_AADEVJ niles_b_Page_20thm.jpg
acb17f7c31a13443a12f6145d46bdbcc
da17ffd52d1c6f208498298558b2e5b17e8d3022
33864 F20101206_AADFCI niles_b_Page_06.QC.jpg
d7d0958daffa43661d0d4c281a567cc3
3d33ad9347b524b8b4f7306fc87f16b4b6b52363
62421 F20101206_AADEVK UFE0021219_00001.mets FULL
fe826388bb764ff7aa97787cc724fb0d
c15165a6baa8b6bb26596e740ae6325ae787f4d0
34308 F20101206_AADFCJ niles_b_Page_07.QC.jpg
d492cd30c6e03182a78318ffb12d5992
5efb23e176c31b7c37ef46b1756b8a1ebaf8663f
24162 F20101206_AADFCK niles_b_Page_49.QC.jpg
487ece69839b87d207f5cb21ebeadeca
b9faa188b1c24cc9cfbffa6ab1b09f63aee12198
114201 F20101206_AADEQQ niles_b_Page_15.jp2
b7b429850b6f85f12196f79057f6cbf1
236b3ac72261222a29d5dd02fd4843e943d770e2
23710 F20101206_AADEVN niles_b_Page_01.jpg
8adc0439b3c84e009db64a0bd57d49ab
8c28000565a4fac8f28f6a3b09ddaa689e26dab3
8675 F20101206_AADEQR niles_b_Page_35thm.jpg
65026c47e44a0b00cb5bc74404c53908
3ac829948c5a788a88ea81066da2ce716ca9e506
8214 F20101206_AADFCL niles_b_Page_37thm.jpg
d56cb3322f7cf75676846151a8466465
e8462c7f8faebb1303f2b68f2f26ddbf864341af
3623 F20101206_AADEVO niles_b_Page_02.jpg
6ce1158daf93dbf3203ce10fec440831
20f21fa9bad151766f09883c500dc8e4a8c362a0
36248 F20101206_AADEQS niles_b_Page_23.QC.jpg
499f94ae453831bd33e00a354c30b188
923fe568a8024a1f9f0a28bc848066d419bdc90a
8626 F20101206_AADFCM niles_b_Page_39thm.jpg
770b98ae243150af61deacc08b011165
ebedd4b4843cdd038bdaec6a857239a8e356507c
87604 F20101206_AADEVP niles_b_Page_05.jpg
cefffdaf305218065ed5166b3c258b9e
3b8378e2996c7678083c4161c98c7294b036abfc
35800 F20101206_AADEQT niles_b_Page_17.QC.jpg
30f9f5a1f5d885d798beaaced9731ac5
3579c46f60967f8333124e0a4d8c15ad5dd4c112
8756 F20101206_AADFCN niles_b_Page_45thm.jpg
e2d4c01d5b7f4b1cf7cbf4a8243349ce
e5261893eb3f988935668955b739f36f2c5e7e4d
101017 F20101206_AADEVQ niles_b_Page_06.jpg
d0ad942ab9b814e22703bfad38ba5bf2
8b1d4d260eb60894a4bbe082cf973dbc47cf18f0
2405 F20101206_AADEQU niles_b_Page_28.txt
c74b42e41dc47631a8aa7891d15121b9
99078b6b3154c2871c6b888a02e07380cc3bb73f
1742 F20101206_AADFCO niles_b_Page_03.QC.jpg
ab5fb0fb2ae90d31f01227729b3ce081
624ad2993bac487564d534b07997641809b313a0
105129 F20101206_AADEVR niles_b_Page_07.jpg
d828cbe1072e346f7107c1518915e6f4
fee31ccaab15b630af373fcba3fbf49a3ff2505b
15847 F20101206_AADEQV niles_b_Page_16.jpg
243cd3668c99aadcdfddf1fe63fadbe1
c41f8d47386945a663c7904d058dd27b8b7ffe86
9248 F20101206_AADFCP niles_b_Page_36thm.jpg
bd7fba6b0a87b0dba1668948d79b47d6
e6dd0223141cb156057c3eacea7345babd829c0e
112173 F20101206_AADEVS niles_b_Page_08.jpg
4c104812280eb364986bf7863cb0363c
2645a14fea755472183c2d3f003990bb79ecee09
62335 F20101206_AADEQW niles_b_Page_40.pro
d0a9695de8aef8c1ebafe1b990ce8ff8
afd591b4e6fb95baa29265439b1ac565483abb43
39029 F20101206_AADFCQ niles_b_Page_31.QC.jpg
f75824303b827ed8a9e03a3cba28f959
c98b7b381150028465a0096bc7a4fdaf26087204
111615 F20101206_AADEVT niles_b_Page_10.jpg
ac9f429b3c9eaefc070364e9ca770eb4
3143db1c54f39b84ae48ce03ab0d3a97de833db0
8893 F20101206_AADEQX niles_b_Page_28thm.jpg
64dfaad1a818001057dd19a59c14f046
f9510796d38a724257590409d2edffe3eb4a73bc
8324 F20101206_AADFCR niles_b_Page_14thm.jpg
9b9482cf9fb9076bdd08e699446eb7a2
d3393a211ab3643c5ee8da93e228456c4d703c1e
113434 F20101206_AADEVU niles_b_Page_12.jpg
2ee523c6ca4b94e24c9e16705e50b04b
23b5c6a3f5b8b360016d8dc8f60016a929519359
2321 F20101206_AADEQY niles_b_Page_24.txt
988eb79bef0b38e7a229bfeac40cf400
5364fab0765740bdb8fa3e7b3f1f7e33026509c6
8625 F20101206_AADFCS niles_b_Page_27thm.jpg
166e2c68f61e6df19503469c77f98849
f4786e589a6de01d477cca236456280ae4a39137
104218 F20101206_AADEVV niles_b_Page_14.jpg
b114cd3f9a2695ddbfdcd776db551296
3880e3ee7d5fc87499871073673ac890c822666a
120 F20101206_AADEQZ niles_b_Page_03.txt
330f7c503b438439b6459765fde075c7
158ae4015013e3e01ed7e9f43c121c0d299b3d13
35814 F20101206_AADFCT niles_b_Page_22.QC.jpg
7ba1407216b6e76873dee99056064884
7e3a834fb20ac97e7fc4043b508023f7af654efe
108418 F20101206_AADEVW niles_b_Page_15.jpg
da52121c8cabd80ee49605a870b68554
777ffb50900d9094094f264addae5a96234a694f
7657 F20101206_AADFCU niles_b_Page_01.QC.jpg
d354bce6bc097059927eda13c5ba6fb9
2d282efe1d44e4e8c14c1399726d42d351144f1d
111843 F20101206_AADEVX niles_b_Page_17.jpg
06a68cdf0ccc05be9ffd08f3f67fb078
1fd11fa61a2155a30d08723e6afa63897f2d7775
34528 F20101206_AADFCV niles_b_Page_14.QC.jpg
126f29210cbb35dad75e0791c5f21b47
68dfc478467d4e2e74d6e466c0b6049e8ebbf0bd
104627 F20101206_AADEVY niles_b_Page_18.jpg
20f2c7c9d64bd8a45cabac0093907dc1
3f4bb703b2e9dc6a8484f3cb07653bd10ba1893c
8413 F20101206_AADFCW niles_b_Page_44thm.jpg
af718b359bf45fc4359934e324a8e66c
a7890c097dedbc038d4e434e8ba51caa8f84366e
510 F20101206_AADETA niles_b_Page_52.txt
b39e5c40a97fbd1918ac5f4f21cea386
6e8bb78686363aa31013a27a9ca538848be91e32
70392 F20101206_AADEVZ niles_b_Page_20.jpg
47f89e1144cfce4253a0305d05e7af92
036d1c3050e755db5fa42a404245ab2d8b3c9bbf
8976 F20101206_AADFCX niles_b_Page_31thm.jpg
93801290368412bbd1dd7303b7290c89
d47ce3ef9e58cd6d5923f1910871fdcbe4f90386
F20101206_AADETB niles_b_Page_05.tif
b6d5ea6500277ac65fe63381a7240265
6bec3fa850a7610838fa1d90313d67b41856b340
72686 F20101206_AADEYA niles_b_Page_46.jp2
4146567c516d1a956bf697302b7b4c5d
f124ea5129a7428f20b95d77e0572a6d7454e0ac
54956 F20101206_AADFAA niles_b_Page_17.pro
cde452ba8a3731a39c322ffed81c0b12
c65e750298dd1139fccdb441151f7de6e4ec5db0
8532 F20101206_AADFCY niles_b_Page_42thm.jpg
1cc7c4b326a229360e0f96879931d407
b33053bc92e0870a9df8bdde3ce28bb275b72597
56487 F20101206_AADETC niles_b_Page_24.pro
a8e6462d48a8e45bf1a240a77b650abe
0b984cdbacf61ed3627b629d2056f9019d27eb57
118024 F20101206_AADEYB niles_b_Page_47.jp2
b6c51364bc9a4381fe4e306f6e6d4868
d26bdd53007617b419adcb5bd0d2db64f28cc30e
53115 F20101206_AADFAB niles_b_Page_18.pro
1f57d120913635820bed5cf42fc60ecb
b0e45cb9f4fb003f7fe2dcf7df6f95659a8e791e
80264 F20101206_AADFCZ UFE0021219_00001.xml
2f3973db468a48f6f6ace930b441b086
c896444bc2c1b7f4acc942143a677f827ca73d52
81869 F20101206_AADETD niles_b_Page_51.jpg
13918028c178af109ead8b59c6640c0f
35ca247261bd4f35188633f7144418b9bec78b38
55230 F20101206_AADFAC niles_b_Page_19.pro
3ef92be9f30d570d9688d475b7b1c5d1
00c7cad4884c19d5889ce23a7a736d76e6a54a75
57245 F20101206_AADETE niles_b_Page_29.pro
ccd3f199b40b03bc94552b06e1e27429
a5e6237ecc5afd60c07b71272a580659e3d7cb2c
114295 F20101206_AADEYC niles_b_Page_48.jp2
b68c9125372069241fa994647bf47be4
99dae390ed9078f97eb9b26f337a8bda12c5be60
33735 F20101206_AADFAD niles_b_Page_20.pro
a367dad2663ed0525ac41e7f1dbca1f8
d8c62c2fdeaca3559cd761d10d5a6bc02e787837
72614 F20101206_AADETF niles_b_Page_49.jpg
212303a20163bb3ef312eddec854619f
b761a723e76c3579b4ff4a7f2ec31a434b10513e
77175 F20101206_AADEYD niles_b_Page_49.jp2
065c5c4dbafd7f9e80ba05bd837231ea
b1f59b8814a4d89b1c92d0cd51b32482e280184d
48100 F20101206_AADFAE niles_b_Page_21.pro
c04872940c2bd54fbc94f0c50056c414
f6857b006109f9486f5a20b99a320332d512ebe3
38461 F20101206_AADETG niles_b_Page_12.QC.jpg
0ded775708f57a04b594b90c6c3be3c8
b36c37e1326ee058af45a75281472bf8e2ca16c9
118415 F20101206_AADEYE niles_b_Page_50.jp2
574e4ab537ce6cf493bda5ca5a65c1b1
d1ce25c30d80f8603089a030b44db6c2a51c3141
64088 F20101206_AADFAF niles_b_Page_26.pro
c5ca30aa1c1d59543b2dcb43e8b26b6c
d8f19b4e9791824926769288876f9806c42d5a56
34310 F20101206_AADETH niles_b_Page_39.QC.jpg
aaa37c00aea73f3748a8404ffcadc16e
dd6e2e1f5a91c6e99b9d610690d0d5e9ce75e368
56559 F20101206_AADFAG niles_b_Page_27.pro
ef5e2fc8439d079aded172dc6ef98918
c9bb63aa334599988a06d8988a5c430b7616575d
729 F20101206_AADETI niles_b_Page_02.pro
96765cfec7e058ef3311857ddf4cfc43
b736d518591fe8f65073cdf5541573e2a5fb26b1
88964 F20101206_AADEYF niles_b_Page_51.jp2
188b8659ddab717da8ab16b5338adc7c
33396e29e6a133f5942f1b26b8bb473aa0e89976
73766 F20101206_AADFAH niles_b_Page_31.pro
b36ab0692a0c77a51c82d005e4e80860
60df1c637f4e590af33f928b402bd2c3f8e34a85
24680 F20101206_AADETJ niles_b_Page_51.QC.jpg
8e679946ceeb442259dd77d828ca8180
1507956a92f6688bebd5e105ac1dfa9ba24749d0
F20101206_AADEYG niles_b_Page_01.tif
bd6be1fe8b050ed6fbed2ff6660f9872
569541e43fe6eb47018f5fddc3eb8c6f8e6e98aa
63905 F20101206_AADFAI niles_b_Page_32.pro
35af814eb33992ef0f0372e9fa273d2c
cc0168458e04e64b05d9f25d7f42af167dd45c51
53664 F20101206_AADETK niles_b_Page_15.pro
cbbcc2ea1d1b3ee1a4fef5a4877df842
908671e0bcbfb318560cebec009de4b235fab201
F20101206_AADEYH niles_b_Page_02.tif
9c7315e721712939ce37bc003bcbfe3a
73d9673fadece1b9904d89dd892da3730a03a265
131044 F20101206_AADETL niles_b_Page_32.jp2
aead3571aa392218fab9d36d7a7ce977
1fdb030a767c3ea2401d822e38aee8f432be4c1e
F20101206_AADEYI niles_b_Page_03.tif
fcc5aaf9b2ee850c3c2f01a18abf765d
8b9d911aa9bbffecfd3a2ceb561b23537bed8ef4
56397 F20101206_AADFAJ niles_b_Page_33.pro
cc2313393507ae5e57d2162dde347630
145685cabdd145af15c0db40fb72dc5d66faf815
5164 F20101206_AADETM niles_b_Page_03.jpg
eb6f781bcc38b69370750295176dc171
5ea5d1ef8e924faec77171e7454d5852a535035f
F20101206_AADEYJ niles_b_Page_06.tif
5ee8f33bb2407d98bf91f10cf48637ed
40ba46a3af9ee37874f9a45b8f79470d0e8e349e
61226 F20101206_AADFAK niles_b_Page_35.pro
1663040df41c4047a43d95ac9fbc88b3
d014dcb84ceb865ac705cec068274093ddb94550
34436 F20101206_AADETN niles_b_Page_24.QC.jpg
eda5173db4b406b84175672d5ad8d262
fe06f89298337c087c7e50e5a4f2eaa9343d2eb7
F20101206_AADEYK niles_b_Page_07.tif
d85b11b2e536ffc10db73cff4f28fb06
ec93d87ef3c3fa37051eda4bd083b03c05501a84
65280 F20101206_AADFAL niles_b_Page_36.pro
7443f8e443b73cb2e1537d5ad58513ad
392db566203d78b97300cdd0cd61754076320de9
35994 F20101206_AADETO niles_b_Page_13.QC.jpg
d7c4a34d6ec8eef71f7b9c3fc6520156
97b4c9413854c32da484ad891f4cf023352e3a10
F20101206_AADEYL niles_b_Page_09.tif
0ac5dbf8af0a30fc8925df1354af34f6
4fc46d1b142227446ac9e11bc755c1728cbef7ff
8528 F20101206_AADETP niles_b_Page_29thm.jpg
7faad660069e9b6eea207f49c1c89481
f7693f87870f68ebc3ecf7c1c5c5ab1dccffa6ac
F20101206_AADEYM niles_b_Page_10.tif
20f2ac4f0fc08235949e74eda3aa13e4
7ca192d3d943f0ba2c9edb0bc3ba3755a3d237f4
55541 F20101206_AADFAM niles_b_Page_37.pro
9030694e63b7b53fdd36a1ca240a5828
4d69e6a192fad84c57473697f196247cc69a00ff
9270 F20101206_AADETQ niles_b_Page_11thm.jpg
9046dfd828c4a18116347a56315afc71
978ff4ac5a6ba63fd92c521f166ba2d320b22ddb
F20101206_AADEYN niles_b_Page_12.tif
4be9b9878c6b8933b8baa512d95f0b56
f5a240770d62240b76e98876237bfd98e9d96eaf
59906 F20101206_AADFAN niles_b_Page_38.pro
9fb881eb3780906cd5f84b0ea6ccee69
12cd79c4ce9db78dff09400e12e21ed2ef6722d9
20568 F20101206_AADETR niles_b_Page_46.QC.jpg
9dbad14e39b82f7f647cf8fae31252bc
23922b2fce6c348dae16aba93884033b0049ff0a
F20101206_AADEYO niles_b_Page_14.tif
2d5e28537a654c75d5a3105b57d723d3
9f197dd47e6cf101f7b42826b3b92fb83144d5ad
53409 F20101206_AADFAO niles_b_Page_41.pro
bbcccc13a0b7ef770cab917b5dcff1fb
47e813a92401b41fffb734f0be6aa78b7315a78d
F20101206_AADETS niles_b_Page_08.tif
cb72ea201f26563239733605342f88a3
14a718417b89bdd546cf5da0e19e1c2560a48e52
F20101206_AADEYP niles_b_Page_16.tif
a2c09506d552d55e709f73bdf15a506a
d44fab0be6894cf4c01777a7256000b3c94d4cc9
55352 F20101206_AADFAP niles_b_Page_44.pro
429ecf6bae35187192565f2d267a161f
b0224b596b60d3949cbaaea8f6d410d629cedb37
110767 F20101206_AADETT niles_b_Page_13.jpg
efc4d8fd6453ce7c6c8cdf5ce4768433
81fa4e5f98887b62e1406577ee8c5b7ec09c9d17
F20101206_AADEYQ niles_b_Page_18.tif
aabccb6b7537b4ea3cd9e719411aa19e
23db40798fe59a63fa1c4f881c0bcb16fe374db5
59675 F20101206_AADFAQ niles_b_Page_45.pro
100d2e513d4bceb096d6dcbb458ecc40
727825bbbd918e4b4ad8c8ff6e94e420f3aa3966
2501 F20101206_AADETU niles_b_Page_30.txt
dfba479b25a9dd45d8e8ec46120d2b9d
ec4216ac20de5f44946cb127249eab99b6278445
F20101206_AADEYR niles_b_Page_19.tif
6b69954690c087bbdc989190b6a5f93f
e3835a8dfa703835b7c1e69d17bd890692988c04
33719 F20101206_AADFAR niles_b_Page_46.pro
a37402a581661aceffdef1b01f5480b4
369e3327a910f963df3a33cf4be04692184c6092
6592 F20101206_AADETV niles_b_Page_51thm.jpg
fed15e299c42dbe865812f710057bd81
fa931fefa1b1040ba66c46bb6b81112dc0e00533
F20101206_AADEYS niles_b_Page_21.tif
1411f347aea5a613ee90ff424934c762
8e800c3ccabe4863d39449aa45092bf7d6bc8eaf
54334 F20101206_AADFAS niles_b_Page_48.pro
8d92ccc39ad8f92572920b2ffb52fccb
b680dfbe7edc1cbba67bae47befad6e4afad1aac
2450 F20101206_AADETW niles_b_Page_45.txt
6c1b5d32b9dffdd035fc68ef19678cfd
ce07d6bb638c1e12485910916d7d44d879a5b41a
F20101206_AADEYT niles_b_Page_22.tif
b5293f1c770c026a401b1a3145b80bca
abf961d2754fa7b134881827bb10f6ccc0a1399d
11826 F20101206_AADFAT niles_b_Page_52.pro
b7a7ec25ad3a84b439289f4dc4c9c61f
b167ea51fd87416c48925fcf35f5960d0e4d86ee
7132 F20101206_AADETX niles_b_Page_05thm.jpg
e0c73451dcedf222babce7ad1bd6ebdb
895f5426045166be4812fd61ec30167efed21488
F20101206_AADEYU niles_b_Page_24.tif
c2478cadac3cc23757fe316a96757b1c
e87832a6a76e28a649dee498814de8aaff7ab1d6
486 F20101206_AADFAU niles_b_Page_01.txt
be9f8926b1e01c6653f05b510af7046a
f944303331bf22f8397efb0913d0581e7107a7b0
115532 F20101206_AADETY niles_b_Page_09.jpg
681f8ff69c4189f0d42ea1e17b3b7a68
0c2dfebe6656e7148caea509522badeb69e4726e
F20101206_AADEYV niles_b_Page_25.tif
e2758ec83078f5f9ace4b33d215faadc
d04ffd39cda1fce9bf22d1d6497af4a6a9d66310
86 F20101206_AADFAV niles_b_Page_02.txt
4be39ac06bfdc5c0fd6b110b36ac45a0
45fa6903d10d51559fc94d59022414c011b173e1
107231 F20101206_AADETZ niles_b_Page_11.jpg
7a81b840da3bafb9cc1e8eab2575de4b
2a14c62c1640b5a4cb5784d5ddf9eac1d280d6b4
F20101206_AADEYW niles_b_Page_26.tif
a454e09757259da221a9c6d9b3ded092
d79ee2a59f36704f1c874f6102eec7391e4d95ff
2386 F20101206_AADFAW niles_b_Page_04.txt
970b764413f837f3744894a046cd7c4a
98ac4b2fd0f73c432902898e1c41429666c73adc
61568 F20101206_AADERA niles_b_Page_09.pro
777abb91b7bd13c9a3c17ed10c0a8fe7
b5c3e9892cabb9b4ddf12731540c7d972964874d
F20101206_AADEYX niles_b_Page_28.tif
746c88aec13da2fe782cf0220a987b81
0836f478319513a9d5bb979dca343f49bc2d55bf
2048 F20101206_AADFAX niles_b_Page_06.txt
cf3441b0e619433d38d4119511edc125
ed56b50c2af53f22ccd9c3cff52142a47ed80f45
119012 F20101206_AADERB niles_b_Page_22.jpg
1fae07afc7cfe0329b91bfaa24ca35a4
68056cd983ea7a3e92ca9d80c00bee73a78797a8
F20101206_AADEYY niles_b_Page_30.tif
c850cd5cfbf5e2f3ff90c639cdce38d2
cdbefe6d2338319d5ff9772e9f1cfabef72f73f9
2406 F20101206_AADFAY niles_b_Page_08.txt
e23c3a381a122c847631f8b4e0ab5793
5595f6264e0873502fa62bf3e64067603680a2c9
63189 F20101206_AADERC niles_b_Page_23.pro
f05b92593dd5c711b3849a2b814f5405
81079756a06274f061a34b7a1556f47d441fcfd3
98237 F20101206_AADEWA niles_b_Page_21.jpg
937085074dcc9ce5ddf8b2be122fb263
cdaa0f058383276abcf712c352dc3b0eaa94f6f7
F20101206_AADEYZ niles_b_Page_32.tif
12a5136f6e02f37a2e3f2710e19870af
39f40ce8fff921f4bb90a2cdd7ba82e886a2dc46
2439 F20101206_AADFAZ niles_b_Page_09.txt
88c857228b0e33f6fa13873833af8a29
b2f1c62c1f0e8ffcea48931469f58642780969b1
23199 F20101206_AADERD niles_b_Page_20.QC.jpg
821ff66da25f4a71ce260d2261022665
5ffbe94e6abe0bb7df16ccc44dc65370423781e8
120943 F20101206_AADEWB niles_b_Page_23.jpg
950452353b9a675c8faeb8509b13a238
2544b8000df015dc530143ca8842cf7f27fb2c8c
74153 F20101206_AADERE niles_b_Page_04.jpg
6292cf0ce75e7b465d0a6ab9606d96ce
805a7dbd0d14bdd22f1cfce7bed6353c0cb46b7c
1083 F20101206_AADFDA niles_b_Page_02.QC.jpg
0cdc821cdcbb3c372828bb1aedd16236
dbc18ae309afa5918e7f0a25c004a704ef0d2ec2
110839 F20101206_AADEWC niles_b_Page_24.jpg
9d0a5883bc3653ecb21676aba1b1c986
ac30919516092b47a44eb22ab35c4f024efcc55d
36246 F20101206_AADERF niles_b_Page_40.QC.jpg
7d684e093cbcddd56526fd85c0bb9976
b452076b0a8789ea420b1779bce0e9aad2b5596a
675 F20101206_AADFDB niles_b_Page_03thm.jpg
34f122805ea7172bfbb36837e8526a15
313d4d5ff712cee3cfe9d299154f6ae158b18a75
107669 F20101206_AADEWD niles_b_Page_25.jpg
7737029719c573b0922f9cd3af0b6bcf
a7c839371e82861d9a8f159b56b1218aa8069f66
111904 F20101206_AADERG niles_b_Page_27.jpg
de234f8b51c7dd8e146eeb89c7981f65
aef36894516a4512adca03e2069420300c4dab4b
4594 F20101206_AADFDC niles_b_Page_04thm.jpg
74e538c1f565f4a8abae10f5015428da
5bf2936c7e59089ca76969a54a60e87c01dd15aa
123810 F20101206_AADEWE niles_b_Page_26.jpg
50e243bedb3b7eb63a7c9025e73c5378
15a4cceee0ac0e397a2a5f022404da54a6f555ed
8380 F20101206_AADERH niles_b_Page_25thm.jpg
0d3b76ac556c39e86a4cfe22408bdf63
dd4000b9b7d89d54bc5e5cdb35258ff680cff884
17634 F20101206_AADFDD niles_b_Page_04.QC.jpg
d1a5d620afd3881238a4398f3ac442db
6b0eb9fff8d15c44d445362389d05600a3e52f62
113340 F20101206_AADEWF niles_b_Page_28.jpg
a7af502a3df45f436c43d96fda2072b4
01f928002d6931d624e8c03e107e57b199fbb3b5
9057 F20101206_AADERI niles_b_Page_52.QC.jpg
11b10c997a01696544b6d876d98a5338
a6ed0cb5d872d13dd0e735b532697802231cc376
28501 F20101206_AADFDE niles_b_Page_05.QC.jpg
46b81604269458dca2f2c25bd7f4c69d
3e889931564d20e22f9e5a1f337bb0b452c3fcd8
111270 F20101206_AADEWG niles_b_Page_29.jpg
5f76a86ccbd1d5afce84d8a3d7bdca6a
34e476e76476cc56042cf37dd8ea31b5de967617
8719 F20101206_AADERJ niles_b_Page_41thm.jpg
4706c045bd18624a8fff27e5ce1b50e3
eebcfcd1fd70cf7d4017b3af2f5e070c8acd49c5
8172 F20101206_AADFDF niles_b_Page_06thm.jpg
d28348289b339707a4644e09528e32c4
f17baba7cda497267c9c9dc1cd2e89975678cfa2
119242 F20101206_AADEWH niles_b_Page_30.jpg
4e81115c7a2fd3880e09b9f02b450cc0
afa9bc15cb325eb1b099ecc2bd2f78100eedf86a
2699 F20101206_AADERK niles_b_Page_36.txt
f4796f3c845e0a4e5fc8b32646de8777
6fdba51cd3fa03bf62a6053ed46212c988a5741c
8655 F20101206_AADFDG niles_b_Page_07thm.jpg
14166e8c1c2a380f17d7ee488c1e3b8a
202520fb02b8e4842e20b0acb8c3db9e3dc56724
139976 F20101206_AADEWI niles_b_Page_31.jpg
8f88774b58f3ee44a6b072ea44aa55e0
1c0341a76509f82213a6b49b6ac246414a758e01
113976 F20101206_AADERL niles_b_Page_11.jp2
563deb4c77cc83a0f54d7416cf593104
55e4b8fba39257b61833e5d622c5724dbed1980f
36071 F20101206_AADFDH niles_b_Page_08.QC.jpg
49da2b2ee02087e0fd5a095974448016
e64d173287468218817a87b7e638ead26d3ea814
124886 F20101206_AADEWJ niles_b_Page_32.jpg
d2bcdf9cdccdfc1e16a912045e944246
f346876967a7b3d1126cab5819223673b45fc42c
8412 F20101206_AADERM niles_b_Page_30thm.jpg
780e2d2c05c902dcc064795d02450e50
2d2087443be72d24071e24dd8a25cb98b5fd3966
9076 F20101206_AADFDI niles_b_Page_09thm.jpg
557008eed21c516b0bd54cdf7d9162fb
908c1b4c4041a1495a2703eda1056b3480bf73c2
111331 F20101206_AADEWK niles_b_Page_33.jpg
a57d70ae3c0bb88e8dae92dbde8bdafe
d9968d64857c9a1702a197f5b32977de78d989a0
51507 F20101206_AADERN niles_b_Page_14.pro
894d331bad0d80ae16d6cf4f5f1c6000
48ad1f1f3ad9c83a3f4dec3d4d3da69262ce241c
122471 F20101206_AADEWL niles_b_Page_34.jpg
bff13127a735ce62e2d386aea7c85e3d
9e6a0d8314ad9c71f380550e8aa060be4cba231e
F20101206_AADERO niles_b_Page_27.tif
628261249ee7502c0fd371501c278d08
cf89a70695992a6d866a634540398d8571cc517c
36455 F20101206_AADFDJ niles_b_Page_09.QC.jpg
864ba18aa8e5716e9b6d4e6d7f7c12de
2cc99ffdf5928ee4148f9d01f00b724a0de5e8d1
120679 F20101206_AADEWM niles_b_Page_35.jpg
18ccacf6fef8825980d5e66fc55ece6b
aba76a0840cebc5a5783037147134b121de4894e
126228 F20101206_AADERP niles_b_Page_36.jpg
33310d8c7873dbade08d610872e8d38f
88c0e295a77666f3273d85a3365cea8f212ba5e2
9315 F20101206_AADFDK niles_b_Page_10thm.jpg
1dd784cf2d1f01303a70a6903c037c86
6331d682849f8451aea26b165a9779222ef50825
112344 F20101206_AADEWN niles_b_Page_37.jpg
739c6b105c361d08b21bdf34fb7e490e
a2fb00ceb3882c57c6e4872496ee060fee9b29b8
9152 F20101206_AADERQ niles_b_Page_40thm.jpg
e1bcc89d65d39a6e85f1aa052ad0f024
81210cad277a685e227f7106ecf77fdc14574234
34938 F20101206_AADFDL niles_b_Page_11.QC.jpg
e292f341cb47ab199831eaa3ed56354d
dfdbf770c837902ce3dd775b148f459a826b3afe
117005 F20101206_AADEWO niles_b_Page_39.jpg
a151be8a392c42538754361bdc68e13a
0aa68c11249663226aa32be6c4efab0417941aff
58794 F20101206_AADERR niles_b_Page_28.pro
45980ecba0873f14921f2bb06ddb8d10
b7309bac92134a7bca9cdeb5a71cf9ae3f7ce8a5
121395 F20101206_AADEWP niles_b_Page_40.jpg
6cffdb1cba8fd423518aaa0e13fe30fe
08152aa87c89a2e6c06f49ccddf391474e47e739
8693 F20101206_AADERS niles_b_Page_18thm.jpg
edf2f85a424e954e2d1dde16e4fd05c9
ed086b9c6a8ab9804368db0d67371c73dcad57df
8957 F20101206_AADFDM niles_b_Page_12thm.jpg
ba30b36a55945804abbbc462a265c7cd
14e3149d59eb2e52eeed8703389244eed924b1a3
122490 F20101206_AADEWQ niles_b_Page_42.jpg
31c431b12fc9f7c54e3ac23e2a5b8183
e73656a46fd66df20b51c2b2bbc8821c2bc25fba
8712 F20101206_AADERT niles_b_Page_24thm.jpg
d632448c7cc90dac92340d4faedc4227
edc20939a3396339059664dd1bc9ac79a65dbb9f
35085 F20101206_AADFDN niles_b_Page_15.QC.jpg
bf0c8321addbde87968b49493ff579cd
095ca42126e0686d8badcc0a16bc3ba7b99fce3f
108816 F20101206_AADEWR niles_b_Page_44.jpg
1295975000416e59384932e0e7368da0
e310baf75d0b2e6f1a0cf92321c5a53cfdf70c68
F20101206_AADERU niles_b_Page_52.tif
4d4e1c75a3640584e8bbd418a36d5661
ab39ffd5252546c6116eef7dfb5607957d7b696d
1547 F20101206_AADFDO niles_b_Page_16thm.jpg
572b288c5247b13ab50552329e550612
09c83ee868e2486434319219c186071b84e1d65d
117771 F20101206_AADEWS niles_b_Page_45.jpg
28850f3bed4a5db9c35185ef96a7b873
e43b6691b6ac6478882456e8503487731499bdce
F20101206_AADERV niles_b_Page_29.tif
b8838fdd911b74b5dcc4e0e95406c94f
d5cbd2a7c6e30f5113904fb202e73e74626c8028
5872 F20101206_AADFDP niles_b_Page_16.QC.jpg
8516dee6f805f4eeac6e7f413d2f07ee
9acf73900b2513bf82cc1e5eb2093f0c061f8722
68170 F20101206_AADEWT niles_b_Page_46.jpg
338f99966afbda8eb49d143c5b69fc04
ef261e6c7221f40485792680b3a35a94cdec3399
F20101206_AADERW niles_b_Page_23.tif
7148af13570c9484cd7f7d458644d879
e2231746f3be50533992eee82ccd24fe6ae1df2a
8889 F20101206_AADFDQ niles_b_Page_17thm.jpg
681628764486de2287f087e78c0c353e
33946d3899ac5cea7895db562bad9da2014c90ce
110302 F20101206_AADEWU niles_b_Page_47.jpg
b46cf40811f3f928eab700b3ed79339e
8704db115fba7a66842b27edc9ba1867609c3939
58921 F20101206_AADERX niles_b_Page_39.pro
c78b20f5a91a9b3b9248773b8c2ca805
2a65ae476e4fb46f826d5c9d6444d2b805322224
33658 F20101206_AADFDR niles_b_Page_18.QC.jpg
5256f9e2fb34c5569f88e530dd655f13
7734ff6f199113fa0e55cb649e7a5b6a2e4a7b8a
108769 F20101206_AADEWV niles_b_Page_48.jpg
3d615ebe7b8d49eaee83d3131879a42f
88ad1c726ddcd2cb2d94b860a846804f9cbd7ca3
54810 F20101206_AADERY niles_b_Page_47.pro
fe0bb9bb30403ce331de86ce9822b6a9
4c61e87b53d27add1e84d6523864dd2c8079d34d
9117 F20101206_AADFDS niles_b_Page_19thm.jpg
66c345dd377ca7d8ee0fcf3c9997209d
db18fa715ea3578a8684bae21cf28c60d230528a
110548 F20101206_AADEWW niles_b_Page_50.jpg
03e3387ff07ba2d127342cd8c78b3b51
cca62516d995729686bdc5498ae2882fecd4daf9
122842 F20101206_AADERZ niles_b_Page_08.jp2
ceccc6b245440c3fc3a5ecf008df3cc9
c19e3d4cb847afbab23e0199678b73635a9d5cbf
31905 F20101206_AADFDT niles_b_Page_21.QC.jpg
01032ca3ef6530a0b3eed80e81ec92ce
f811f5246f059be4014fe61626e99a221374aa7c
27915 F20101206_AADEWX niles_b_Page_52.jpg
64789a97bf04527be2d943d4bd873973
6c2219c36f34c3c7a2c74a41b669476560a990ea
8515 F20101206_AADFDU niles_b_Page_22thm.jpg
c25750c5ae65430ca619a65d563084a8
27bbc4d9810d6f4e29f49fd7b1f0297d55fb18ad
23506 F20101206_AADEWY niles_b_Page_01.jp2
554780f682c958d1252f005629ea40cf
318e9d0af1c6fc4551ed3362ef88733e4848a554
8982 F20101206_AADFDV niles_b_Page_23thm.jpg
29a45f682f565f0e77cdc1caa8758a9d
68fd52d9a3b4ccfae377a563c10936e30ed3aa64
4741 F20101206_AADEWZ niles_b_Page_02.jp2
f2cb06bbb921922caad3c67be900d360
3c3a9fb77feee0c85220a11a6e1805e17dbb0040
33175 F20101206_AADFDW niles_b_Page_25.QC.jpg
1dc20d1d46b6e74f2e25af5b503a1610
9e5adf1120f61ed3cfe99e76f25a94fb44887af3
2608 F20101206_AADEUA niles_b_Page_34.txt
c08da57355973f7d69d7cd207d7790ce
b384d78709932335db6681027bdac37da63b5727
34723 F20101206_AADFDX niles_b_Page_27.QC.jpg
a2bf32eecc96852d06137ac3b74116bb
63151eb27a81fd003425995392b6dbb4d461df13
1051980 F20101206_AADEUB niles_b_Page_04.jp2
91ca156f27024db315db52ed4edfc303
551733d6e05f6dc5a17e5b1f4bc18af6ae70962e
F20101206_AADEZA niles_b_Page_33.tif
adecd723f9732c3fa929625b13094d51
762004d01c9731d267af5e88d5652e7c3b926e84
2191 F20101206_AADFBA niles_b_Page_10.txt
34c1646a0edcbbf47ff61d993b67528d
36e95ef1a03368ac5e4ff2b0410b81460d6b8833
34564 F20101206_AADFDY niles_b_Page_28.QC.jpg
7c2b1d9386810d5d2689986062786912
ec423d571407d630f3c7191a6bd06b8f106e462b
60850 F20101206_AADEUC niles_b_Page_30.pro
4c740417c75f2eeb14cb92f314f29b09
b0a69ce3ff48235daf94e59020fcbffd6662c4e2
F20101206_AADEZB niles_b_Page_34.tif
78826f482c2184bd59cab7831722f859
9633a90d252e9312b072e0aaea51b456c984648f
2104 F20101206_AADFBB niles_b_Page_11.txt
12d1acbabbef2c6320d5fe05a16501c9
80872db48ca7436805f00c9ec72d834b7b74960a
33763 F20101206_AADFDZ niles_b_Page_29.QC.jpg
cf2814c6947afbf18cf2ad2c68d41ac3
0e67daef77c7ef16750ab19f1bef84c10d9f2842
F20101206_AADEUD niles_b_Page_02thm.jpg
6d4a276378c8043c3b91f0b1768b4247
ac516e9dff3d12a111e7ff99a21d329202d3115f
F20101206_AADEZC niles_b_Page_35.tif
94dae094550e4d5f27b0bde5133d9e0f
ea60cc27768de6a48824e863e95fd4257fe2e1ee
2236 F20101206_AADFBC niles_b_Page_12.txt
c82d509620f7588c0dd29c1858d5b1f4
eff47492b8a3ba40a105b5b3f138ceee3759e9c9
F20101206_AADEUE niles_b_Page_51.tif
c18bd1ff1c3b92f21d1558d682137baf
13d50343d6c228c3f7c7131adee0565349e18da2
2180 F20101206_AADFBD niles_b_Page_13.txt
8d97742702c2564d03e1e4613fda52dd
04f69256db1cab4354b5006251d7da4c47d8c95e
63058 F20101206_AADEUF niles_b_Page_34.pro
4bc4d57335f8ca0e3b74bf7e35acd084
f8fa3ec9d02ed82eb32f7c96651ff2d95784eaa5
F20101206_AADEZD niles_b_Page_36.tif
7676b09733fd5997e1941046ce5f6865
f0eae9bf3b7de7c5763247f01398bf24d1512f75
2121 F20101206_AADFBE niles_b_Page_15.txt
621cc8365911abf18ea2bec68325d1b8
b89186df0a0f1123af1d5eb2631c933424e9367e
8770 F20101206_AADEUG niles_b_Page_15thm.jpg
418cf34965a9a9515d2d486ec09d8e74
f9d19d587a76003ea0690681eee2d2f7b7afdde2
F20101206_AADEZE niles_b_Page_37.tif
5884833f47e85a2aba4c72bd5befc508
397ba5a26594c587b94e915473eacbbd5723f2d1
247 F20101206_AADFBF niles_b_Page_16.txt
ade5808dc699f8e5264b42fa56963e67
50b3ec69f95503d9bdecdc23831b5401ae31931a
1821 F20101206_AADEUH niles_b_Page_05.txt
bbb6489cb310764991ac5f717cb04f7b
b96667e8bdec6b282a0d370f0c13f017c12325da
F20101206_AADEZF niles_b_Page_38.tif
9b1194ee8bdd76745c8ac9e951d9e75e
26b141d2d107e179350c139b7e97bd288e0aa2c8
2226 F20101206_AADFBG niles_b_Page_17.txt
0acf0587dee45c4df03697f487fe3596
6c1682699b4b74e937d0ab338981d381e877cfce
35284 F20101206_AADEUI niles_b_Page_49.pro
3697c261f178adfe42023be25a34295b
359a00da6a4ab7b9c10dfd7e76bef5ee7d9463d8
F20101206_AADEZG niles_b_Page_39.tif
d0bb9b2a3ff846b9b84dcc635e8ba8a3
f102402ec802f759fb0e6f3073ab4f3dbe25f0e7
2178 F20101206_AADFBH niles_b_Page_19.txt
79452751ac2e734b132cfeed17ae05b5
f16f005b5eee7a72fd2beb6d4ebc3bf1c3c3b0cd
F20101206_AADEUJ niles_b_Page_46.tif
8a548c13da4a6b2de25817d42db92a2e
3cc5806be587221ff980a5a68bae573689747348
F20101206_AADEZH niles_b_Page_41.tif
1d5085450bed639608702dac08a5cd61
d2a19c9160aa8adedd3410f05abb77e0050a8b10
1342 F20101206_AADFBI niles_b_Page_20.txt
bb2a4f49f6aaaabdaaaced97b751ce72
0d6fb68e2961716fc837b583de571c504549a552
108168 F20101206_AADEUK niles_b_Page_43.jpg
dad1ef61ac70cce5d26cedcbc25148e2
c617c54f527a6ab4f0bdc44f5c43d2071b2fca61
F20101206_AADEZI niles_b_Page_43.tif
4ab5c4a1023bf2d6d334ef9ce6d8e884
88052771852972aea916505e2c7e33e4646ee297
2623 F20101206_AADFBJ niles_b_Page_22.txt
26074db89b1fd89ab7d8ff129905aeab
8db629b8897f744a6f1bddbe57557685ffa79806
124584 F20101206_AADEUL niles_b_Page_09.jp2
8eb8a3b78f7ebab45cc36047a51417e1
d435c6f29a82a187fe2d8c6917725f8f33005368
F20101206_AADEZJ niles_b_Page_44.tif
607bb594626aa4275967feb12ac6db99
38b1fba82e659e870613c26ddaec4eec7d0dc639
1411 F20101206_AADEUM niles_b_Page_49.txt
651959e174b23eabdbaf241ca9707f51
2b69a92b851449ade5b25574bbaf7056c8ceb58a
F20101206_AADEZK niles_b_Page_45.tif
6003399d79bb3ee6236d3665fa2ae8bc
315225bbde8b27f7f7eb57c287c9918163f3529e
2595 F20101206_AADFBK niles_b_Page_23.txt
23f9ba8874e1f835ff9a5457c3ab9fcb
a64c372139fd1179aee2ac04f3fedc0b622ef003
8919 F20101206_AADEUN niles_b_Page_08thm.jpg
1d55296fe37e1a1f92b69ad424394297
b13869aacb5522550fa549db3c4b7b8d0bb72227
F20101206_AADEZL niles_b_Page_47.tif
25903b161670ab11bae6ade7d820c33c
23dd4f3528361b9ac996402d34ba62fd2c4903fc
2239 F20101206_AADFBL niles_b_Page_25.txt
c79775fcedf846e816ad9002a201acff
5b57b218293240d48ab40b14e24fb1100d4100ea
109498 F20101206_AADEUO niles_b_Page_14.jp2
abebf2c8fe6ed504c5889f77d46a8a99
c61d4dc14810b6c1cac932e6acfaef1f01c582e0
F20101206_AADEZM niles_b_Page_48.tif
60b327fe1b19067d940b1465b6ffa684
26debde71642590928c7ee88dfe9e906a3cd7f95
2624 F20101206_AADFBM niles_b_Page_26.txt
cd87c90a70f13a2cd48b0b66ec220ef2
749588380bc87744e88078a8279a56f1ea3c6b5b
2091 F20101206_AADEUP niles_b_Page_18.txt
bf0a7377a37572b04287a657495bebcf
0cfa50095165beb5c7e3096e1ce75355f74ac14b
F20101206_AADEZN niles_b_Page_49.tif
b879c4bf39189cfc461229f62d3bd1bf
28b6cd4113099560f5a67c0541eb01e498c04ca7
2302 F20101206_AADFBN niles_b_Page_27.txt
60ae9ecd772659fceeafdd021e109bb3
c90a3417903ff81760aca4bf90a2185901c40633
F20101206_AADEUQ niles_b_Page_15.tif
54cd172ba4e3e17569812d7496145142
427e6d1720ae397d17775c150807253c0d6852b2
F20101206_AADEZO niles_b_Page_50.tif
7a45e3730477a4aa852ca3a67dc23b46
99cdb7d99692220f64a6b3b7993dd45e0947433a
2383 F20101206_AADFBO niles_b_Page_29.txt
4d79be29fd66eba35097140675f983a7
a5024b4a9e70a7daf2e886aa5e4878eccf7ec757
2200 F20101206_AADEUR niles_b_Page_41.txt
85922e2d53b3d74b5488a6d217f609b0
392f049ed075c814d1f2629d39c230e2e5ccbee0
7689 F20101206_AADEZP niles_b_Page_01.pro
8503637c9fb9a971eb21f1ce64e2b81c
0479e55d886c85d24cb3c318aaad4d18aae784c4
3081 F20101206_AADFBP niles_b_Page_31.txt
db9ce440d56c41c7a87744fd193814e0
f2b37e9f41b80e2322103e09764181d09e802c54
112114 F20101206_AADEUS niles_b_Page_43.jp2
70c54bed289c8e2c87c072b55236b053
30b38258b7cb0f3060f467819285edc52fd42493
1715 F20101206_AADEZQ niles_b_Page_03.pro
62b5ec885557dd2261208d333e655c3e
63467e9a433e6cefb7fb5798554131d72434601a
2601 F20101206_AADFBQ niles_b_Page_32.txt
19bfd7b5857a0bd875e1d31384260c65
69b042ca2d09c757ce21b59ae32b2f43720413c4
110069 F20101206_AADEUT niles_b_Page_19.jpg
3cb80de47dc3deb4bc6afecd414eeb2a
5b749d1063d25ef4b92f621c6058665874d1d2e2
55422 F20101206_AADEZR niles_b_Page_04.pro
d3d17682f80316ecb9b1d468f52b6055
aed493e868edf1ab6eb2bc08de5610d04c12987e
2294 F20101206_AADFBR niles_b_Page_33.txt
8a0d89ebe8f55dd12f043177d693e3f4
e9d9b0f455587e4997bbd9c05d0848968417a2ad
F20101206_AADEUU niles_b_Page_31.tif
cc5d2682b8cf02fcbcdd87343eec5459
d36c24f5ba48c29869fd1c4df668e1d9013aa9f6
41355 F20101206_AADEZS niles_b_Page_05.pro
5b2bde614df278320c90858d26d7afc0
bba265efc4c20cbd791a207f50357f13371a1b7f
2473 F20101206_AADFBS niles_b_Page_38.txt
ffb4d435e9ecb6ffcec1f432266ce20e
740e7cbcc865e79f83ccdc64ec86ddf4b00250ba
120384 F20101206_AADEUV niles_b_Page_29.jp2
f8c6dbbfcec05f435e3bd3cec0acbd02
8646ace5528a3e7007126d572f32acebbadb11f7
51998 F20101206_AADEZT niles_b_Page_07.pro
626360371ffb9b8410f23623f6b375c0
00ed84e86576b5388e4d89d12468584aa9edadb5
2409 F20101206_AADFBT niles_b_Page_39.txt
5cadb42b6b1f48c48b5d2853857e7385
8f3ec49599f1c9553ae705fda0fce40f47aa9ca4
105803 F20101206_AADEUW niles_b_Page_41.jpg
81b51daf1fe2f932286d91daab73bc3d
51ec6ac7d51efe65b09c4f06afb02ed50f56996a
60130 F20101206_AADEZU niles_b_Page_08.pro
cc07dfdbfdfa9fca05362d972e9bdb1b
a519c2d02d4dc791dbf4a1e4372d00594b5e78ac
2536 F20101206_AADFBU niles_b_Page_40.txt
1d55329aa0fd906d0bdb1f6a1a4d6754
9c6b4344c0f0a90b407f6ee0abe5fc8149d4c862
52882 F20101206_AADEUX niles_b_Page_43.pro
94d5fcd09213b4f03a8d533ef42fe814
63fddae5bbf33cfebaff869004bc0ed884815e83
55560 F20101206_AADEZV niles_b_Page_10.pro
7935b9ad7ec3223a1b833c96b9217160
5caedca3b48b21e5f1717f92f77369a9441a0cbf
2548 F20101206_AADFBV niles_b_Page_42.txt
e50bd5a7e91a31aabb83c3af7f4945bb
d97a373233d6072b857665eec57fd7839d327273
2481 F20101206_AADEUY niles_b_Page_35.txt
d600b294d5cbb5db8d14ad92f1e17ea5
95af1ebdf2815191ff3b282f7d15a2e05cc891ef
53314 F20101206_AADEZW niles_b_Page_11.pro
744b2e3a56f954656a78d142c45f2793
0935e57380ea9ea0bdc62b6eeec885b77fcbc6f0
2173 F20101206_AADFBW niles_b_Page_43.txt
b3decb7977b5cb685f0e2408339e334d
ba6a6d7d12acc8ad89ad25d5b2f65d9334d29f3a
149067 F20101206_AADESA niles_b_Page_31.jp2
6e2ad94c082f1ba734d4175d8f7a1a39
41c708bdec69c1141c6ddcad677507947c77e750
34920 F20101206_AADEUZ niles_b_Page_45.QC.jpg
da9a907be255b891931fd4c55c70d5a6
7d56963e0c330d60409ef32285fa8423bd1e6c01
56201 F20101206_AADEZX niles_b_Page_12.pro
0d72829f65b36f12140535b5365b3668
f402bef8c2b345c354be3b2713f0e41b43182887
1415 F20101206_AADFBX niles_b_Page_46.txt
ce8651e38d8f4d690e97368ea2f23906
fd7f684623351569f07d5df91a0ea83f02e88c2a
2024 F20101206_AADESB niles_b_Page_21.txt
504a7bba18cd2a761fdbac7fcd60b8bb
0d5a3b9cda6d00d7e3c5d1e7c89eaf4a02fcf519
55463 F20101206_AADEZY niles_b_Page_13.pro
edfc09db2f51f64ce301d8a8d0c036a3
b3602ae8d443bd87d1734ac0a8bbc53ce314b317
2232 F20101206_AADFBY niles_b_Page_47.txt
69c604b23e797453e1d75b710c3a289e
dd2d3194d11af2465847ebbf5a16467b8a4865d6
119287 F20101206_AADESC niles_b_Page_12.jp2
d4308df1cc32116179b2c9ee6b71c4df
f9596df714eccc5947f2eced5c6def0a9b50cbb6
7050 F20101206_AADEXA niles_b_Page_03.jp2
a63251b1aca726ac32968af3a5833064
f6ad9de53ea0772d637b6592cd95f7932f0251e7
6139 F20101206_AADEZZ niles_b_Page_16.pro
b947bb3e2617d6eaaa7ad39d06a10c50
cdbd043835e863869213ddab3da71156b4790f0e
2138 F20101206_AADFBZ niles_b_Page_48.txt
f3038f741395447eacc76770b32f7616
2926bea4f99b1a8877403f40636a65f4b36c5ae0
F20101206_AADESD niles_b_Page_11.tif
72c9ebea883379097b3679fb6ce63dec
bf9dad38aadcc81cee4ea848e5e6f1c01d9741e1
8120 F20101206_AADESE niles_b_Page_21thm.jpg
8e1df8434693a573cd225cdc78941e56
81a43ef2372573a8abd5b69e5f67c6659e73cad1
92309 F20101206_AADEXB niles_b_Page_05.jp2
e98f8d45a44168cbc19ba6246c8f4a9f
10822d2c68e5b490ced5fe965832b154456b48ef
F20101206_AADESF niles_b_Page_40.tif
3c47a48c4145ec93302b70252ef41408
ffb81501a22417ad7408a51ac4cd1b7a1f294c70
35918 F20101206_AADFEA niles_b_Page_30.QC.jpg
85edee129a59b01ef96b89f04d023da5
e770eda7a48e1c3d9483c8a600c87dd303da3f36
105804 F20101206_AADEXC niles_b_Page_06.jp2
f8dc27a12fbd166c157e6b6a8502272a
5cd77b074e24013a3ecd40180f35b44bfb02ff04
55047 F20101206_AADESG niles_b_Page_25.pro
4d52c6a58e92a649e4a8cecb9599adc5
2a7e057dadff3920711bab6cbcd8bb30371103c5
8830 F20101206_AADFEB niles_b_Page_32thm.jpg
91b654ac857b2fcaf14ec8778e7435e6
c47d54444d4759aa4f681cd9163f9eee686c45e9
112260 F20101206_AADEXD niles_b_Page_07.jp2
8111147a70914088ae4df5909be28b83
5a3140a6d0a337e81ae4a669c7c698cceb7de06e
25271604 F20101206_AADESH niles_b_Page_04.tif
ef059a79513f41cafc473f5fbac47e8b
6b69250806b808bf7e207d7c89e36812728f52a5
36252 F20101206_AADFEC niles_b_Page_32.QC.jpg
2aa93c3ad40a8bd9e22e89d82220e961
22c3860aafd9cf6cf58a46a532dd7cd22175f893
117140 F20101206_AADEXE niles_b_Page_10.jp2
836bc3548ea76bd00276ab47db035339
3e7a2723774760967478a4ca5a0b75e5808911bf
62257 F20101206_AADESI niles_b_Page_42.pro
b0e4fa43b4615aae9b361ce1b4d552ee
eff9f9fe2dfae3a45b1abcd6e23232d5ca04ccda
9156 F20101206_AADFED niles_b_Page_33thm.jpg
ca99affcb0e7a3311d958c404d70a0d1
215f42ff02a03c7e082de4cce2a1419e53a9cd2b
117945 F20101206_AADEXF niles_b_Page_13.jp2
a600593f99c3596a5fea1d61e20451c7
7e3e57ee38f8b52c074d52dd2b212ffa0d5d787b
35654 F20101206_AADESJ niles_b_Page_47.QC.jpg
115ab04710f62110bffa589d1bc4a3cb
172bd64729c11d72ca1d75554556ea8d47fb4068
F20101206_AADFEE niles_b_Page_33.QC.jpg
713e3b469d58b22cbde05465eb174156
e9cddecbbd4b3469590252a61ec1d5564aa82642
17002 F20101206_AADEXG niles_b_Page_16.jp2
d4aea8a4576d58718da322f29f9703be
c1ccdf4f7204f775e42bc207f254b77d0751ac65
49266 F20101206_AADESK niles_b_Page_06.pro
f92783ae21e9cbdd94bde4c057381fab
a8b48dad21a3cfe1096f24b8b965f33fd1af5a2c
8857 F20101206_AADFEF niles_b_Page_34thm.jpg
60713d0781665e9d2d81e420e3c5f8ba
4896d2ffea8c46258e9c50123254e9227a4accc2
118352 F20101206_AADEXH niles_b_Page_19.jp2
01a785fdf2e5cc324f4e7065cc2819d8
f43319c2c1965e2fe6d02f001874cd70d4872c47
116875 F20101206_AADESL niles_b_Page_44.jp2
8e24ac84cefc8dd0be015c8d8648536d
9aad97739af1e65e4d2b736bf4b0cda293330931
36630 F20101206_AADFEG niles_b_Page_34.QC.jpg
fa07c6aa57d15850d1aa029e3d6ab004
59cce087b1d87232262f38a90d0cebd3f1692ac2
75322 F20101206_AADEXI niles_b_Page_20.jp2
2fb45dde1f5ef5a72327e58e0542227b
a4b030e7f52ebdc183ca8bcf6b42cc1b13607931
33772 F20101206_AADESM niles_b_Page_43.QC.jpg
2a22065c5fce552a4f0aa84fc646fcaa
ff5789fc432ced41b464d4ca74e1ffa954e4fa7f
35826 F20101206_AADFEH niles_b_Page_35.QC.jpg
93120f3391df118c788b7fc4084f148c
47660dc945dd603cd8dd56075d44d02f280863f4
128157 F20101206_AADEXJ niles_b_Page_22.jp2
63a6f157d3167dad499b1e45a8f3558c
540c5a77ced5beb3f11453c67d8e94f63fe42599
36797 F20101206_AADFEI niles_b_Page_36.QC.jpg
f2944bdf95af4e87261ee6c8a0b6571a
5ec13016c577628bb552a950ea9fda1079feda55
128938 F20101206_AADEXK niles_b_Page_23.jp2
8e6a13f68b0ecd11c2c46166680e7f74
7d2f6f3d62f019a37a15db2f53aa384a0297a0af
117604 F20101206_AADESN niles_b_Page_38.jpg
e3201ac136b2096322e121131bd96127
6a86f14432cf4eeed0ee048ef19b118a4215bd12
9106 F20101206_AADFEJ niles_b_Page_38thm.jpg
fc106e975d63a58a74cc099bf2dcb30a
f7ad4d530d52d7f5ba68ec57bd88c6d1b11fece1
117999 F20101206_AADEXL niles_b_Page_24.jp2
850723a86d73b3f6dbbe347db015beb1
7715878e67c8858810baa7d9c5854922026d5b9b
53811 F20101206_AADESO niles_b_Page_50.pro
27f6d5ca34fd52b08d9a734eefd15b5c
f59059167ac10ed23540b3769b9cab5115ae0df6
36135 F20101206_AADFEK niles_b_Page_38.QC.jpg
f8765b7693de96fe165ea159869bded9
afb69691ae0b1cab1857fcb0d36cf4b111d436da
116039 F20101206_AADEXM niles_b_Page_25.jp2
c127e648f866ae5e4446a2cfdbb5462b
564ec3d31bfeee0e63b21c9b6ca114ecad080208
128320 F20101206_AADESP niles_b_Page_35.jp2
b0cf8c82d417ea26c7eca6a1636044c5
ef2105fcbceea42c8521b1b0d926a53af83a2d1e
33696 F20101206_AADFEL niles_b_Page_41.QC.jpg
d80a032184868d3c2ccc5558995a3e14
720458c741712c4e367226d6b071f8520ebe6752
130198 F20101206_AADEXN niles_b_Page_26.jp2
5a7c227333d85a8275272f6a3e35fe89
e80e47fd41c2f115f73015869b4fd32683db6923
F20101206_AADESQ niles_b_Page_42.tif
3d2baa13b1e3639ee28dd7008cc49398
15570318b7dec2ed502ddc98ff7b2eb4b513eef6
35555 F20101206_AADFEM niles_b_Page_42.QC.jpg
2c6e0156eb87ee0af1527beb00fce4cc
0aa7de99cc7c9b15bd0bcf150248be89dedada4a
118263 F20101206_AADEXO niles_b_Page_27.jp2
e915c3b9082bc4b203b8f7bfe7fee793
a6e3dc42b1d4763eedc3e235e4bb3c98a57417ed
103706 F20101206_AADESR niles_b_Page_21.jp2
7363d23f69e561cd5559a3f351c9c61d
1ed4fe656a987dc4f836ce55776a791ca090f7d5
120763 F20101206_AADEXP niles_b_Page_28.jp2
6f50cb8df946d3527af829bb014b02c3
bfcfaad109bfec73aa48cef7857f027a8d28167e
2230 F20101206_AADESS niles_b_Page_44.txt
faacf94bc7c183ca1881f62bef7af75a
82a1cbd9abf826f099e73aa280d7d0c6e72a4a68
8450 F20101206_AADFEN niles_b_Page_43thm.jpg
7b3a8b6bbe6d1e8fd893c6775ca723a2
6968d536a1ea01e7c132e53e6e3d28e901a202fb
125902 F20101206_AADEXQ niles_b_Page_30.jp2
eadaee6b4f5217b7a4e1cd644d2c4758
95b46d23129b4bd812522e3d79faf935480505ee
2055 F20101206_AADEST niles_b_Page_07.txt
4cfdc1184a8d422f5d4d74ca1e9bde47
0b8c9f4fbd49f4b09cff7563bc9ae0299a862327
33888 F20101206_AADFEO niles_b_Page_44.QC.jpg
b6626705edcc0edeace5ff511fd592fb
6cbf3f3959719bc2fcf605b7c53b63ce9f9bb6a9
118192 F20101206_AADEXR niles_b_Page_33.jp2
a9c827d1b08a6563dc6e4ad2a73a56ec
b5984189c685dfb2e9f2d28e0250cb457f15668a
112278 F20101206_AADESU niles_b_Page_18.jp2
02aba58ac8b82946a6d283f010e80725
0475dd6a5ac4892e741450eeddb53aa2d7f1d719
5258 F20101206_AADFEP niles_b_Page_46thm.jpg
6771ed67182be9668ab27fd90890c904
b28183c2cacfc2496f04a2f392f76eb24deb7b89
133368 F20101206_AADEXS niles_b_Page_34.jp2
19937b8f9823b1407821869ef5bd4adc
e8598cda320effcf75b3e4d48ceadc31ab608a59
F20101206_AADESV niles_b_Page_20.tif
a7f064f8425c31b7e95b769cb4b4c348
a1e9e12649cd9e6e11cbbfda822c62eef7bfcc98
9109 F20101206_AADFEQ niles_b_Page_47thm.jpg
8fe8b3824f1e50f6b82cec3cb4b6c352
ad3924d5213afa588e3c6ff9dc48f58566901a01
134197 F20101206_AADEXT niles_b_Page_36.jp2
655402ebeccce4510814c13dba4c88ec
9682dd3f5e9a7a0985c7857957b01bbdb997fbd4
112578 F20101206_AADESW niles_b_Page_41.jp2
8108af533509b93127aaf13796106980
ede43c0fec65aee11bccdd2129ef0f76b47634f3
9093 F20101206_AADFER niles_b_Page_48thm.jpg
467ed4e9c321ece85ee99cc34e1507db
214a06f23e239e333f20cf28f415b391c12f4087
117099 F20101206_AADEXU niles_b_Page_37.jp2
3a5b90679ff3de460d4317387a46efd2
87c92fe8a892a815303d921e5da9485c6eee5f44
62883 F20101206_AADESX niles_b_Page_22.pro
7faf2a7c24fd693af5b04b2f13f7fb7a
49b45bdce2fde494d1e78b506111f9a121c568f9
6132 F20101206_AADFES niles_b_Page_49thm.jpg
2acf5605225fa3244f23cfbb8f44e8da
73bb7533ffad844fdbc60e0486f4e08292bc4613
125653 F20101206_AADEXV niles_b_Page_38.jp2
7d26ee2b42f30d362339bb8ac78f35f7
8b9a0221737015c9b4c4dfd43aee74c23e87fd2f
8323 F20101206_AADESY niles_b_Page_50thm.jpg
020a6f645c5c881ee69e097167eac933
bd7e2563ee9210ab3a76a5c9bd8320be57937d8b
32220 F20101206_AADFET niles_b_Page_50.QC.jpg
d0cdcbf67c8c5de0ea097f8835ee2395
61c42cd7e68d00e800455cbd501b2abd0c050043
121816 F20101206_AADEXW niles_b_Page_39.jp2
5bf244c543208f67fda5cb027eef96cc
20b668bfdfcc9123df7132243480280fcc4ff1b9
38320 F20101206_AADESZ niles_b_Page_51.pro
ca27b97088c56837ea8553b9ae9dca1c
14524c3b607b421a37c894065efd49b6f69be4f6
2229 F20101206_AADFEU niles_b_Page_52thm.jpg
b3a3a0682634259bde071fbf857159d6
2159341140adb637d6414c215a69d4aea4b160ec
128800 F20101206_AADEXX niles_b_Page_40.jp2
b672d43e70b7fdfb8306ec1c6733e2c9
56ddf210b1e95362b4208d72945797269f27dde7
129245 F20101206_AADEXY niles_b_Page_42.jp2
f1ab19fd7b0412aeb3cbb3c764c04e47
3c704c1bccd172b66b446ddf9b464376aa8b06bc
8867 F20101206_AADEVA niles_b_Page_26thm.jpg
d5ac14d5b99641b09859b34fd0702f0a
8470d7a43a6649fe2f81a412db478bec2f6a24c1
124861 F20101206_AADEXZ niles_b_Page_45.jp2
5b261c95549a813a912d2676f6872954
87fc641450793df42d3c90224623dae0744197f1
29202 F20101206_AADEVB niles_b_Page_52.jp2
93f14ecac33db87a06894e028e2caf70
0473883a1dbc74997ee70f635409b1a9efffe742
2029 F20101206_AADEVC niles_b_Page_14.txt
009d026d7d1feb4a7f73666e416885a2
9b681e6c7bd7c9c490c8c674a76992ee0b7069b6
F20101206_AADFCA niles_b_Page_50.txt
12e87c1d3011e0d4bc9bfcd5247b9a85
08b594cd9f67126cff270e7038cd698a2857d4ac
F20101206_AADEVD niles_b_Page_17.tif
31583203a03bf69df74e34ef9c0aa240
f3d5644a3dc8d07346b679899802be49d6cceb1e
1541 F20101206_AADFCB niles_b_Page_51.txt
91aa7b7ed10bf1afeb48171d39ad97bf
390d8a5b6347877207242f73460157e1d6473aa3
2276 F20101206_AADEVE niles_b_Page_37.txt
1c548154107e06965a584a064caa3357
341cb6c082d4cbe7f1da54a39aa85b974e19c5dc
1986 F20101206_AADFCC niles_b_Page_01thm.jpg
d655c4a2480300ee895cce97f6105ff3
297e0cd86bd88a5e7e1e5d0091ad6c4a6eced2b4







A QUALITATIVE FRAME ANALYSIS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IN TWO BRITISH
NEWSPAPERS






















By

BEAU NILES


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007


































2007 Beau Niles

































For Sara, Jacob, and Alana, thank you for your patience









TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

A B S T R A C T ..................................................................................................................................... 5

CHAPTER

1 L ITE R A TU R E R E V IE W ......................................................................... ........................... 6

B ritish F ears of Illegal Im m migration ........................................................................... .... ... 6
Media Influence on Public Opinion and Public Policy .......................................................10
Public Opinion and Immigration Policy ............... ........... .................. 12

2 METHODS AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ....................... ...................................17

3 R E S U L T S ............................................................................................................................. 2 1

ID Cards .................... .......... .........................21
U united States Illegal Im m igration......... ....................... ............................ ............... 24
Tragedy Stories .............. ..... ... ........................................................................29
Racism ............................................. ..... ............. 31
L aw and O order ............... ....... ...... .................................. .................................33
Other Countries Immigration Policies ................................................38
Exploitation of Illegal Immigrants ................. ........... .............. 41
Temporary Workers and Amnesty ....................................................................................43

4 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ...............................................................................47

LIST O F R EFER EN CE S ....................................................... ........................ ............... 50

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H ........................................................................ ...........................52





















4









Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts

A QUALITATIVE FRAME ANALYSIS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IN TWO BRITISH
By

Beau Niles

August 2007

Chair: Constance Shehan
Major: Sociology

Illegal immigration into Britain has become a rallying cry for nationalistic political

parties. Newspaper articles have been shown to influence the salience of political issues, and

thus it is important to look at how illegal immigration is framed and for the purposes of this

paper two British newspapers were used: The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph. For this

paper 212 articles were examined 108 from The Guardian and 104 from The Daily Telegraph.

These newspapers represent two different political viewpoints, The Guardian being the more

liberal newspaper, and The Daily Telegraph being more conservative. Each of these newspapers

framed both legal and illegal immigration in different ways. Frame analysis was used to look at

the messages these newspapers were sending their readers. The Guardian typically framed

illegal and legal immigration in a more positive light, and The Daily Telegraph typically framed

illegal and legal immigration more negatively. The articles were coded based on the framing in

which illegal immigration was presented. The specific frames found in the articles consisted of:

ID Cards, United States Illegal Immigration, Tragedy, Racism, Law and Order, Articles about

Other Countries, Exploitation, Temporary Workers, and Amnesty









CHAPTER 1
LITERATURE REVIEW

British Fears of Illegal Immigration

Immigration to Western Europe did not begin in earnest until after World War II. The

first wave of immigrants to Western Europe were mainly from Southern Europe and entered

countries as guest workers to help with reconstruction. These workers were expected to be

temporary guest workers, who would help rebuild Western Europe, earn extra money and return

to their countries of origin. This did not happen, however, and most of the migrants stayed in the

countries they had migrated to after forming a new life for themselves. This was not a problem

while the economy was expanding and jobs were plentiful, but when the "oil crisis" hit,

economies slowed and the need for migrant labor decreased.

This downturn in the economy quickly led politicians to call for a tightening of

immigration policy. Politicians quickly saw the problem of immigrants and other "non-citizens"

as employees in jobs that had become increasingly competitive. Public fears over jobs being

taken by "foreigners" quickly led to more restrictive immigration policies in countries

throughout Western Europe.

Immigration in Western Europe has become increasingly politicized over the last

decade. Efforts to curtail immigration have led to the notion of "Fortress Europe." Many

countries in Western Europe have enacted laws to curtail immigration and many have officially

claimed to be non-immigration countries, effectively saying that they will no longer welcome

immigrants into their countries. With immigration on the increase during the late 1980's and

early 1990's and with the elimination of internal boarders the isolation of a "Fortress Europe"

from unwanted immigrants has gained momentum since the end of the cold war with the threat

of mass immigration from former communist countries (Bade 2004).









Many immigration fears have stemmed from sensationalized stories of immigrants

"flooding" into a country. Not only has the news media sensationalized the number of

immigrants entering various Western European countries, but they have also sensationalized the

threat of immigration from former communist countries. Though this mass immigration has yet

to materialize, it has nonetheless become a perceived lingering threat.

The sensationalization of immigration by the media has helped shape public opinion

against immigration. While immigrants make up only 7% of the total population of Great Britain

only 6 percent of Britain's believe that there are too few immigrants, while between 66 and 68

percent believe that there are too many (Simon and Lynch 1999). This climate of restricting

immigration has led to an increase in undocumented workers. This unforeseen consequence has

been the primary reason why illegal immigration has become one of the top political issues in

Britain.

Illegal immigration comes in many forms. From the visiting "tourist" who overstays

their visa to the immigrant with no documentation who is oftentimes smuggled across the

boarder for a fee. According to Bade 2004, most illegal immigrants enter the receiving country

in one of four ways. The first form consists of those who enter the country legally, but then

become "illegal" when they overstay their visas. The second form involves using forged

documents to gain entry and employment into the receiving country. The third form consists of

human smuggling. Immigrants with no documentation seek out an individual who can get them

past whatever boarder security may exist in exchange for a fee, sometimes these go-betweens are

referred to as "travel agents." The final group consists those who are actual criminals that have

been convicted of crimes in other countries and use immigrant enclaves as a means to cross into

another country and escape jail or prosecution.









Many have come to view the term "illegal immigrant" as derogatory and stigmatizing,

lumping those who are looking for a better life with those who are attempting to flee prosecution

or have fled once convicted of a crime. Those who do not like the term "illegal immigrants"

usually prefer "undocumented immigrants" or "undocumented workers." These are usually

expressed across the political spectrum with those on the right preferring "illegal immigrants"

while more those with more leftist views are likely to refer to "undocumented immigrants."

These political ideologies also effect how people interpret illegal or undocumented immigration.

There are many ways of interpreting the growth of the "illegal" movement. For some it represents the
growing undesirability of 'mass' migrations and the need to control and manage migration in the face of
apparently increasing pressures for people to migrate. For others it is almost the reverse a reflection of
the fact that the 'natural forces' of migration will always overcome regimes of control and containment
(King 2002).

The problem of distinction is also compounded by the fact that a "legal" worker may work in the

"illegal" or informal sector, while an "illegal" worker may work in the legal or formal sector

without problem. Thus, describing a worker as "legal" or "illegal" becomes much more difficult,

but this does not stop the government from attempting to "control" its boarders and the number

of immigrants it allows, especially during times of economic hardship.

When undocumented immigrants are perceived to be making a contribution to the

receiving countries economy, they are generally tolerated, but when the economy is in recession

or stagnant, this tolerance evaporates. The government typically places pressure on the illegal

immigrants to leave. Governments also react to perceived negative effects of illegal immigrants,

such as crime domestic violence, and undermining the "dominant culture" (Appleyard 2001).

Many of these perceived negative effects are stereotypes that have been perpetuated by the

media.

British policy towards immigrants and illegal immigration has resulted in a habitual

residency test for receiving public benefits, by 1980 benefits were not available to those defined









as "persons from abroad"(Morris 1998). One of the requirements of entry was the understanding

that an immigrant would have "no recourse to public funds." However, until 1985 this only

applied to Income Support, but by 1985 public benefits were defined using new rules which

stated: "For the purpose of these rules the term 'public funds' includes Supplementary Benefits,

Housing Benefit, Family Income Supplement, and housing under the Housing (Homeless

Persons) Act 1977"(HC503, para 1). However it remained unclear how to enforce these rules

and whether they were legally enforceable because they contradicted previous laws without

repealing them, such as the Housing Act of 1977.

The entry condition of "no recourse to public funds" did not of itself debar local authorities from offering
homeless provisions as this limitation was not cited in homeless legislation. Acceptance of such provision,
however, could be viewed as a breach of conditions of entry, rebounding on the immigration status of the
individual concerned and possibly triggering charges against the authority for harboring an illegal
immigrant (Morris 1998).

This is just one example of the unforeseen consequences of hastily enacted policy. In their haste

to enact laws that would deter and restrict immigration, the British government did not foresee

the enforcement problems that would ensue.

This paper will look at the research on media influence on public opinion, how public

opinion shapes public policy, and current media discourse on illegal immigration. The media's

influence on public opinion gives it a unique ability to shape not only opinion, but through that

opinion also have an influence over policy. Because there are difference along the political

spectrum on how to deal with illegal immigration, the content analysis will look at two British

newspapers The Guardian, representing the leftist side of the political spectrum, and The Daily

Telegraph representing the right leaning side of the political spectrum. It is important to

recognize both sides of the spectrum because currently the left leaning Labour party is currently

in power, and the right leaning Tories have attempted to use illegal immigration to make gains

where leftist parties are generally perceived to be "weak" on illegal immigration. It is predicted









that there will be a more understanding attitude towards illegal immigrants in the Guardian,

while there is likely to be a more negative attitude portrayed in the articles from the Daily

Telegraph.

Media Influence on Public Opinion and Public Policy

Aside from personal opinion, virtually all of the information that the public uses for their

decision making and opinion forming comes from some source of media, and the media also

represents much of policy maker's information on public opinion. "The mass media is the

primary conduit between the public and policy makers; Policy makers follow the media trends in

public opinion, and the media are the publics primary source of information on what the policy

makers are doing" (Soroka 2003). These mass media outlets may take the form of newspaper,

television news, radio, and most recently the internet. The media has the power to determine

what it will present to the public. In this way it can shape what is on the publics mind. The

media, especially the major newspapers and news stations, such as the New York Times, L.A.

Times, Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, etc., influence what other news outlets carry as well.

When one of the major newspapers presents a story it is often picked up by local newspapers,

and the same holds true for the major networks, the news gets broadcast through their affiliates

and potentially makes its way to every television set in the country.

Page and Shapiro (1984) went so far as to say that the news reported in the New York

Times "ultimately finds it's way, in diluted form, through other newspapers, magazines,

television news, and word of mouth to the general public, and in this way the New York Times

may not be a bad indicator of the general thrust of the news that reaches the citizenry. Their

article demonstrates the effect that a single major newspaper can have on the rest of the media as

well as the general population. Jordan (1993) also found that the content of the New York Times

editorials correlated with television commentary indicating that the New York Times news may









drive television agendas. Jordan's findings indicate that major newspapers can have a significant

influence on setting the agenda for what will become popular news and what is considered

newsworthy.

Jordan's New York Times study also found that newspaper articles had a significant

correlation with changes in attitudes towards the subject matter that the articles were written

about. It is likely that the New York Times itself did not have this impact because a very small

percentage of the American population reads the New York Times, as state before, however,

many other newspapers pick up stories printed in the New York Times, as well as network and

cable news channels. This potential influence by one publisher has many implications, such as

who decides what gets printed?

Soroka 2003 found that mass media plays a significant roll in driving public attention to

foreign affairs, which indicates that the media can influence what the public becomes interested

in. He found that the changing importance of foreign affairs for the public is reflective in large

part of the mass media content and that changes in public opinion towards foreign policy can

have an impact on policy making. It is important to note, however, that many of those who

report on issues where public opinion may affect policy making may not be knowledgeable about

the subject of which they are reporting on. This is especially true on complex issues such as

immigration. With economic, social, and cultural aspects to consider it is likely that those who

are writing the articles that could influence the public are not educated on the issue. With such a

politically charged issue, some write articles with an ideological agenda using hot-button terms

with the specific intent of changing public opinion toward their ideological preference.

This has important public policy implications because policy makers also use the media

to gauge public opinion. The issues that are presented in the media and the manner in which









they are presented can influence policy makers because they may believe that the media is

portraying an issue is indicative of public opinion. At the very least policy makers are likely to

believe that the media through their portrayals are influencing public opinion thus driving policy

makers to adopt policies that they perceive as being what the public wants based on what the

media is portraying. This is shown in Yanovitzky's (2002) study on media effects on policy

attitudes and actions: "it suggests that the impact of news coverage on the process of policy

making is primarily manifested in the timing and intensity of public response to public problems

as well as in the nature of the policy solutions pursued. In other words when public opinion is at

its most intense, which the policy makers judge based on media coverage of an issue, policy

makers are most likely to pursue policy changes based on public opinion. These policy changes

due to their nature of being at the whim heightened public awareness and opinion are likely to be

responsive rather than preventive measures used to assuage public opinion and appear to be

doing something to correct whatever the perceived problem is.

Due to the relationships that have been found between the mass media and public

opinion, it is necessary to look at topics that are on the media's front burners. Since policy

makers respond to the public and the public responds to the media, studying the nature and

degree of the media influence on public opinion is crucial (Soroka 2003). It is also important to

look at policy implications that stem from public opinion. Due to the fact that the media holds

sway over public opinion, it also holds some sway over public policy since policy is often

enacted due to perceived public opinion.

Public Opinion and Immigration Policy

Public opinion has been shown to have significant impacts on public policy. When the

public perceives that there is a problem and their opinion becomes negative, often times there is

a response by policy makers to enact policies that will assuage those public fears and turn public









opinion more favorably towards those in power. This is not always the case and much research

has been conducted to determine why. These studies generally look at how much public opinion

effects policy, whether this changes with the salience of the topic, and how generalizable the

findings are. There has been a large amount of attention paid to communication, especially

persuasive messages, and according to Payne (2001) persuasion is considered the centrally

important mechanism for constructing and reconstructing social facts.

It would be difficult to find someone who believes that public opinion always shapes

public policy, but it would be equally difficult to find someone who believes that it never does.

Public opinion is likely to effect policies which are especially important to the public, that are

relatively simple, and that can be handled by the legislature with straightforward uncomplicated

policies. Of course, very few of these issues exist, and many have equally logical arguments

from multiple parties, which can make public understanding difficult, though the public may still

have a strong opinion. To look at how much public opinion effects policy Burstein (2003)

conducted a review of articles published in major journals and literature reviews. He found that

in those articles he reviewed that: "Public opinion effects policy three-quarters of the times its

impact is gauged, its effect is of substantial public policy importance at least a third of the time,

and probably a fair amount more, and issue salience does affect the impact of public opinion on

policy (Burstein 2003). Burstein's findings serve as a jumping off point for looking at the effects

of public opinion on immigration policy.

Several studies, as well as anecdotal evidence suggest that public opinion towards

immigration, especially illegal immigration, have had impacts on immigration policy. In a

exploring the effects of public opinion on immigration policy in Britain, Saggar (2003) states

that: "Public attitudes constrain the scope of parties and governments. Certainly, policy









proposals to liberalize areas of immigration policy will be highly circumscribed. Public opinion

thus acts as something of an over-arching constraint on policy and political discretion." Much of

this opinion is based on sensationalized accounts of the numbers of immigrants and asylum

seekers in Britain. Though the immigrant population in Britain consists of roughly seven percent

of the total population, a survey found that citizens of Britain believe this number to be between

twenty-five and thirty percent. This misinformation makes it difficult for politicians to make

effective policy to appease the population, which also places policy makers in the difficult

position of going against public opinion. Thus media influence on public opinion, when it comes

to immigration, has placed many policy makers in an untenable situation. On the one hand they

need to appease the public and appear to be effectively handling what the public perceives as a

national problem, and on the other hand politicians understand from polls and surveys that the

public is misinformed about the number of immigrants as well as their impact on the social

resources.

In the case of Britain, the immigration issue is even trickier because of the possibility of

the European Union taking control of a super-national immigration policy that would affect all

member countries. Public opinion could force member countries such as Britain to resist EU

attempts at harmonizing immigration policies. This possibility looms large as the more negative

attitudes the public has towards immigration, the less likely they are to want international actors

holding more power than their own government over immigration. The problem arises because

the public may believe that if the EU takes over immigration control issues, then they will no

longer have a say because their country's government would no longer hold final say on what

type of immigration policy is enacted.









According to Luedtke (2005) public opinion is pushing against harmonization of

immigration policy. He found that there is an effect of the public opinion towards immigrants on

public support for harmonization. Those who have more negative attitudes towards immigrants

are more likely to reject the idea of policy harmonization. This could stem from the fact that

those with lower education tend to have less favorable attitudes towards immigrants and also

tend to have a more deep rooted national identity, which would make them less likely to support

taking the control of immigration away from their country's government because they are more

likely to have more faith in their government than in the governance of the EU.

Since attitudes towards immigrants and immigration have been shown to be tied to

whether one prefers EU handling of immigration or the individual nation-state, it also stands to

reason that their attitudes towards immigration and the EU will have an effect on their opinion

about the enlargement of the EU. Devreese and Boomgaarden (2005) found that individuals'

negative attitudes towards immigrants led to a lower acceptance of European integration. This

has interesting implications for the role of media in influencing public opinion.

With 66-68 percent of the public sharing negative views of immigration, it is likely that

the media has aided in portraying immigrants and immigration in a negative light. The effects of

public opinion on policy, and in the European case on the acceptance of the EU, the media has a

wide range of influence. Thus, a content analysis of newspaper articles is an important step to

look at how the media portrays illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is one of the most

pressing issues in British politics, and has been placed there primarily because of the media

sensationalization of the issue, which has turned it into a publicly perceived "problem." Turning

illegal immigration into a publicly perceived problem has led to policymakers on both sides of









the ideological spectrum to condemn undocumented workers and illegal immigration hoping that

rhetoric will be enough to assuage public opinion without being forced into quickly enacting

policies have not been fully explored.









CHAPTER 2
METHODS AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

There are several methods used in content analysis research. The method that has been

implemented for this project utilizes framing theory. Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) view

framing as the central mission of those attempting to persuade an audience to embrace the

normative idea they support. Framing is the process that news organizations use to define or

construct a political issue or controversy. "By framing social and political issues in specific

ways, news organizations declare the underlying causes and likely consequences of a problem

and establish a criterion for evaluating potential remedies for the problem (Segvic 2005).

Framing is the way in witch articles and issues are organized and made sense of.

The underlying assumption of frame analysis is that a frame is a necessary property of

text. All texts, regardless of how clear or abstruse they may be, are comprised of packages of

integrated idea elements held together by some unifying central concept, called a frame (Gamson

& Lasch, 1983). According to Creed et al. (2002) frame analysis is a technique for approaching

a text by attending to its diverse idea elements with the following question: What holds these

elements together? The goal of frame analysis is understanding how certain idea elements are

linked together into packages of meaning, potentially encoded into soundbite-like-signifiers that

stand for those packages of meaning, and deployed in texts and/or other forms of media.

According to Pan (1993) framing analysis distinguishes itself from other forms of content

analysis in two important ways. First, unlike more traditional approaches to content analysis,

framing analysis does not conceive of news texts as psychological stimuli with objective

meanings. Instead it recognizes texts as containing organized symbolic devices that will interact

with the individual's memory for meaning construction. Second, it accepts both the assumption

of the rule-governed nature of text formation (van Kijk, 1988) and the multidimensional









conception of news texts that will allow for cognitive shortcuts in both news production and

consumption.

Newspapers and other media make certain issues more salient and have the ability to put

a certain 'spin' on what is being reported to lead the reader to see the problem or political issue

in a certain light. For example, a newspaper article may state all of the negative aspects of illegal

immigration, such as the fact that they are breaking the law by entering without documentation,

but not mention the benefits that they provide, such as the economic benefits to corporations

from the cheap labor that illegal workers bring. This allows the media to influence public

opinion by framing issues in ways that can be either beneficial to immigrants or create greater

anti-immigrant sentiment. Van Gorp (2005) explains this relationship as: "the linkage between,

on the one hand, the journalistic approach of shaping the news within a frame of reference and

according to a latent structure of meaning and, on the other hand, the stimulation of the public to

adopt these frames and to view reality from the same perspective as the journalists do." When

the public adopts those frames which the media has presented, the media has exercised its

influence over public opinion.

In forming these frames the media has the ability to not only effect the presence or

absence of an idea, but can also emphasize one aspect at the expense of others. According to

Dimitrova and Stromback (2005) this is subtly done in order to not alienate their audience: "The

subtlety of framing is in the way it can construct reality, impact interpretations, and influence the

audience responses and opinions toward a particular event after the event enters the public

agenda." In this way framing not only affects the salience of an issue, but also the audience's

perceptions. Political ideology can play a major role in the way an issue is framed, especially an

issue as politically charged as illegal immigration.









According to Gamson (1983) for every frame, there is also its opposite. This is important

because of the use of the media by various social movements for their causes. This can be seen

in looking at different newspapers and is the main reason why this researcher looked at two

newspapers that fall on different ends of the ideological spectrum. Anytime there are competing

frames from competing news outlets, it is likely that those reading those newspapers already

share the ideological views of that particular media outlet. According to Payne (2001) an

individual is more likely to accept new claims if they are shown to be similar to already accepted

ideas, and this idea of frame resonance potentially explains both the persuasive success of these

instruments and their social function in the persuasion process.

Political and professional ideologies are fundamental to the way that information policy

problems and dilemmas are perceived and how problems are screened and represented by

different stakeholders (Rowlands, et. al 2001). Following this reasoning it is likely that there

will be different frames employed in the more rightward leaning Daily Telegraph than in the

more left leaning Guardian. It is expected that there will be more favorable frames used in the

Guardian than in the Daily Telegraph, however, this may be constrained by the fact that there is

such negative public opinion towards illegal immigration that there will be less of a difference

than an issue that was more evenly divided amongst conservatives and liberals. Because public

opinion is very negative towards illegal immigration, it is also expected that overall there will be

more negative portrayals of illegal immigrants

For the purpose of this project there were a total of 212 articles analyzed, 104 from the

Daily Telegraph, and 108 from the Guardian. These represent all of the articles concerning

illegal immigration in each newspaper from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2006. These

articles were collected through online databases from each newspaper's Webpage. The term









"illegal immigration" was used to search for articles in the database. Each article returned in the

search was read to check the validity of the return to ensure that only articles concerning illegal

immigration were examined. This is similar to the method used by Dimitrova and Stromback

(2005) for article collection in their data analysis about the framing of the Iraq War.

The articles were coded based on the framing in which illegal immigration was presented.

The specific frames found in the articles consisted of: ID Cards (Articles discussing the potential

use of national ID cards); United States Illegal Immigration (Articles about the ongoing U.S.

debate on Illegal Immigration); Tragedy (Articles describing a tragedy that happened to an

illegal immigrant or a group of illegal immigrants); and Racism (consists of articles which

describe racist attitudes towards illegal immigrants); Law and Order (Articles concerning law

and order approaches to Illegal Immigration); Articles about Other Countries (Articles looking

at policies, and outcomes concerning illegal immigration in other countries); Exploitation

(Articles portraying illegal immigrants as being exploited); Temporary Workers and Amnesty

(Articles concerning proposals on amnesty and temporary workers).









CHAPTER 3
RESULTS

A total of ten themes were used to depict illegal immigration and illegal immigrants. Most

of these themes had articles framed negatively, positively, and neutrally, however, there were

some which had only one frame, and some with two of the three. The themes consisted of

articles on ID cards, U.S. Immigration, illegal immigrant tragedies, illegal immigration and race,

Law and Order policies, other countries immigration policies (other than the U.S.), exploitation

and human trafficking, temporary workers, amnesty, and current immigration policies and

proposals.

Each of the themes listed will be gone over in detail from both newspapers. These

breakdowns will show the differences in ideological approaches to immigration, especially

illegal immigration and different views on what is in Britain's best interests. Much of the

commentary within these themes follows the ideological reputations of each of the newspapers,

with many of the Guardian's articles being more liberal and many of The Daily Telegraph's

articles being more conservative.

ID Cards

Both the Guardian and Daily Telegraph were critical of the ID cards that Tony Blair and the

Labour party have pushed to curb illegal immigration and terrorism. The Guardian had no

articles that portrayed ID cards positively, and the Daily Telegraph had only one article framing

ID cards in a positive light, which is interesting considering, as will be shown later, the Daily

Telegraph was much more likely to take a more anti-illegal immigration stance in many of their

articles, and be more concerned with law-and-order immigration policies.

The Guardian was more likely to take a neutral look at ID cards than a negative one.

During the period being studied there were eight neutral articles written onID cards. Neutral









articles were those which took what one could consider a strict reporting of press releases

concerning the use of ID cards and the way the government envisions their use or reporting on

what other groups are saying about the ID cards. For example, one of the articles reported:

The home secretary, John Reid, yesterday promised to introduce electronic border
controls that will count in and out of the country the 90 million people who travel to
Britain each year, but admitted the new system will not be fully running until 2014.

A second article reported the following

The identity cards bill published yesterday will give the government the legal
powers to set up the scheme and charge the fees it needs to recover the costs of
enrolment, issuing and maintaining the cards and providing verification services.
ID cards are to be introduced on a staged basis. First it will become compulsory
for foreign nationals to register under the scheme, then it will be voluntary for UK
nationals to register when they renew their passports.

There were also articles reporting on criticisms of the program as well, but these articles

were reporting on the criticisms of others and not criticizing the programs themselves, and these

were considered to fall into the neutral frame as well.

The Guardian had five articles portraying ID cards in a negative frame. These articles

framed the ID cards negatively using civil liberties as the primary concern. One article went so

far as to say:

The government claims that national identity cards will help to counter terrorism,
illegal immigration and ID fraud. That's rubbish, says Henry Porter, and in fact there is
something much more sinister about them they will fundamentally alter the relationship
between citizen and state, and make slaves of us all

Imagine handing over the keys to your home when you are out at work to allow
some faceless bureaucrat to rifle through your desk and drawers, your photograph albums
and children's school reports, your bills and love letters. That is the kind of access they
are going to have, and it is going to grow as time goes by and we become accustomed to
this unseen presence in our lives.


Using civil liberties as a frame against ID cards has a powerful message behind it as most

people are fond of their civil liberties and are loath to have any perceived infringements on them.









So framing ID cards as removing civil liberties is a useful tool to shape public opinion against ID

cards. Using analogies comparing the use of ID cards to someone entering ones home also

conjures up very negative connotations, and powerful ones as well considering the value placed

on private property in most developed countries.

The Daily Telegraph reported the only positive look at ID cards in our sample. In
this article the author attempts to allay fears of state infringement of civil liberties by
asserting that "the case for ID cards is a case not about liberty but about the modem
world." This brings to the mind the old phrase "desperate times call for desperate
measures." These desperate times are connected to illegal immigration:

A national identity system will have direct benefits in making our borders more
secure and countering illegal immigration.... I also want to see ID cards made
compulsory for all non-EU foreign nationals looking for work and when they get a
National Insurance number. This will enable us, for the first time, to check accurately
those coming into our country, their eligibility to work, for free hospital treatment or to
claim benefits.

Similarly to the Guardian the Daily Telegraph had articles reporting on the ID cards in a

neutral way. There were a total of seven articles which reported on ID cards in a neutral way,

and these were more along the lines of straight reporting as opposed to attempting to evoke the

authors' opinions and thoughts on the subject. These articles tended to report on what others saw

as the pros and cons of ID cards and were generally fairly short in length compared to the

commentaries that took on an attempt to portray ID Cards in a positive or negative light.

Finally, the Daily Telegraph also had seven articles which framed ID cards in a negative

way. The primary thrust of the arguments appeared to be simply that they did not believe that

they would work. There was little talk of civil liberties as in the Guardian, and the costs of the

project were of a concern as well.


A decision not to proceed with the ID scheme needs to be taken soon, because the
start-up costs are beginning to soar. It should have been killed off in Parliament, but
Labour MPs, apart from 20 brave souls who rebelled on Second Reading, were either too
bovine or too wedded to their party's spooky authoritarianism.









They were also fed, and swallowed, a good deal of guff about the efficacy of an
ID system that, over the years, has been hailed as the answer to illegal immigration,
terrorism, crime and benefit fraud.

One article took a different twist on the cost of the cards and attached it to taxes and the negative

images of government waste.

At long last, the government has given us a clear and comprehensible justification
for introducing identity cards: to levy more money from us. As we report today, ID cards
will not be a one-off cost. We shall be expected to pay to update them whenever we
change our address or circumstances. And should we neglect to do so, should we, for
example, forget to hand in the card of a deceased relative, we shall be subject to
gargantuan fines.

This was the opening paragraph of one article, which argues the only reason the

government wants to use ID cards is an effort to get more money out of ordinary citizens. It is

also important that the author tied this to ordinary citizens rather than people who may

purposefully commit fraud; connecting to the potential of any citizen possibly having large fines

for simple mistakes creates a sense of the little people versus the government. Knowing that

most citizens will make every effort to comply with the law and hanging the threat of potential

failure to comply, through no fault of their own, implies that the system is set up against them,

and thus stokes the "us against them" flames.

United States Illegal Immigration

There were a surprising number of articles in both newspapers concerning the illegal

immigration debate in the United States with a total of fifteen from The Guardian and seventeen

from the Daily Telegraph. Most of these articles were neutral, and The Guardian had twice as

many positive articles about illegal immigrants and illegal immigration in the U.S. than did the

Daily Telegraph. Finally, both newspapers had few negative articles, though it should be noted

that the Daily Telegraph had one more negative article four, than positive, three, The Guardian

had three times as many positive, six, as negative, two.









The neutral articles in the guardian ranged from those reporting on the protests against a

bill passed in the House of Representatives in New York City and Los Angeles to President

Bush's struggle within his own Republican party to best deal with the estimated twelve million

illegal immigrants already in the United States. One of the Guardian articles which reported on

the protests had this to say:

It is being billed as The Great American Boycott 2006. Tomorrow, international
labour day in the US, thousands or perhaps millions of people are expected to join in a
nationwide boycott to protest against proposals that would toughen existing immigration
laws.

Two of the articles also reported on the split within the Republican Party over illegal

immigration and how best to both "seal the boarders" and "process" the large number of illegal

immigrants already in the US.

With opinion polls charting a steep decline in support from the conservatives who
have been the president's bedrock, Mr Bush promised to deploy as many as 6,000 national guard
troops along the 2,000-mile frontier as part of a $1.9bn (1.01bn) programme to seal off
America's border. He also plans to increase the border patrol force.

These neutral articles offered detailed accounts of the current debate and political climate

surrounding illegal immigration and illegal immigrants in the U.S.

While the neutral reporting in The Guardian focused on the debate in the US as well as the

protests, the neutral articles in the Daily Telegraph focused on conservatives being unhappy with

President Bush's immigration policy, the deployment of U.S. military to the boarder with

Mexico, and finally with the civilian groups taking matters into their own hands. While these

articles were neutral in their reporting, the articles focused on conservative themes, such as

"sealing off the boarders."

President George W Bush last night sent thousands of troops to the Mexican-US
frontier in an eye-catching gesture to tighten border security and raise the morale of his
mutinous conservative supporters.









While reporting on them in a neutral way, the articles on civilian groups, such as the Minute Men

were, conservative in subject matter, for example:

The Minuteman Project is the brainchild of Chris Simcox, the editor of
Tombstone Tumbleweed the newspaper in the town best known for the Gunfight at the
OK Corral.
"Our aim is to send a message to Mr. Bush and Congress that they have not
listened to the demands of citizens," he said as he deployed teams every few hundred
yards along five miles of border. "We are modeling what homeland security should look
like. There should be National Guardsmen every 2,000 yards from the Pacific to the Gulf
of Mexico. You can't find a greater threat to the US than right here."

While these articles were reported on in a neutral manner, the subject reported on were on the

conservative side of the immigration debates, as many of The Guardian articles were written

neutrally about liberal themes such as protests supportive of illegal immigrants.

The positive looks of illegal immigration in the United States, from the Guardian,

focused on the value of productive labor that the immigrants bring, as well as positive looks at

the protests supportive of illegal immigrants. One of the articles posed the question of whether

or not the Hispanic community, which the author argues has historically attempted to make itself

invisible due to the high number of illegal immigrants, is finally over its "terror." They argue

that the protests are a sign that even the illegal immigrants are tired of hiding in the shadows and

being exploited:

Yet that is precisely what the west has been doing demonizing migrant labourers
politically and targeting them legally, even as it depends on them economically. This has
made anti-immigration legislation difficult to challenge. Not because migrants are hard to
reach businesses find them easily but because they are difficult to organize as their
fates are vulnerable to the whims of their employers and of the state. The result was a
community that, until recently, was hidden in plain sight. A community that had
essentially been trying to remain invisible suddenly concluded that their invisibility was
only making them more vulnerable.

This exploitation of migrant labor, especially of illegal workers, was a common theme in the

portrayals in the Guardian. The argument being that historically the United States has allowed









illegal immigrants into the country to do work that its citizens would not do, at least not for the

wages being offered, and exploiting the workers by paying very low wages due to the threat of

being deported.

Migrant labourers are crucial to the US economy. Yet xenophobia among a
militant minority of the public allied with opportunism among a majority of the
politicians has conspired to demonize them. The Minutemen, a vigilante group that
started out hunting down illegal immigrants on the border, now targets day labourers. In
December, the House of Representatives passed one of the most draconian anti-
immigration bills for a generation.

Each of the positive articles in the Daily Telegraph were about the protests supportive of

illegal immigrants. They did not focus on the exploitation of immigrants and the protesters

attempt to organize to be recognized, but instead were about the "power of immigrants" in

general. This power seems, to come solely from the large numbers of protesters, as this is what

the articles focused on, for example:

The metropolitan melting pot is home to millions of both legal and illegal
immigrants and, although estimates varied wildly, at least 500,000 demonstrators were
thought to have taken part in some form of action on Monday.

The articles focused on the political implications of these large numbers of protesters and

who would come out on top between the two major political parties in the U.S. The protests

were portrayed in a positive light, but they did portray the illegal immigrants themselves in a

positive light, they barely mentioned them at all.

One of the two negative articles in the Guardian was not negative towards illegal

immigrants or immigration, but instead negative towards policies in the U.S. and towards what

the author considered vigilantes patrolling the U.S. boarder. The article was written in a negative

tone towards immigration policy in the U.S. however, thus it was considered to have a negative

frame. The article argued that individuals who were patrolling the boarder on their own would

create problems for the "real" immigration officers:









Hundreds of anti-immigrant activists were gathering in Tombstone, Arizona,
yesterday to begin a month-long unofficial patrol of the border with Mexico. To greet
them, hundreds of immigrants' rights activists planned to travel to the desert of Arizona
from across the southern US. And caught in the middle, are the thousands of
undocumented immigrants who try to cross the border from Mexico each day, and the
hundreds of US government border patrol agents who try to stop them.

The second article was negative towards illegal immigrants in the U.S. The author went

so far as to say that "everyone thinks they have the right to live in the United States." The also

mentions what she perceives to be a double standard in that the people who expect to be able to

enter the U.S. are from countries with strict immigration policies and boarder control policies, of

their own.

The negative articles in The Daily Telegraph looked primarily at the political expediency

of President Bush wanting to grant "amnesty" to the existing illegal immigrant population in the

US, and of the breaking of the law by people entering into the U.S. illegally. According to one

article, the corporations who backed President Bush in his reelection gain too much from illegal

immigration for the president, or congress for that matter, to do anything to truly "seal" the

boarders:

Immigration across the Rio Grande is too useful to America and, through
remittances, too lucrative for Mexico for either side to summon the necessary
determination to seal an immensely long, and often harsh, border. Mr. Bush's tinkering
should not blind us to the fact that the benefits of the present situation outweigh the
disadvantages.

Thus these articles argue that the correct policy would to be to "seal" the boarders, but

politicians lack the political will to do this.

The second type of negative articles were those that portrayed those entering into the

United States illegally as criminals who deserve to be prosecuted. This ties in with the first type

in the sense that there should be more "boarder control" but these focus on the criminality of

illegal immigration rather than on how best to solve the "problem." These articles use the









"stealing" of jobs from native workers as problematic and argue that boarder enforcement is the

only way to deal with illegal immigrants.

Tragedy Stories

There were articles in both newspapers which depicted tragedies involving illegal

immigrants. Most of these tragedies involved large groups of illegal immigrants, either

attempting to enter a country (some of the articles involved tragedies in other countries) and

articles about illegal immigrants being the victim of tragedy when already within their

destination country. It is important to note that none of the articles in either of the papers

portrayed the victims in a negative light, and generally showed a sympathetic view of the

victims.

There were a total of eight articles concerning illegal immigrant tragedies. These articles

would all be classified as positive in the sense that they portray the victims in a sympathetic way.

These include articles concerning a tragedy involving Africans from Zimbabwe who were

attempting to enter into South Africa:

Dite residents told officials they saw the large group try to cross the river, which
is currently a raging torrent because of heavy rains. The group held hands to form a
human chain, but the surging current swept them away, according to witnesses.
Zimbabwe's state newspaper, the Herald, said the number of dead could be as high as 60.
Thousands of desperate Zimbabweans cross the border to South Africa each
week, fleeing food shortages, unemployment and state repression, according to human
rights groups.

There were two articles concerning this tragedy as well as two concerning an ongoing

trial involving a "gangmaster" who is accused of allowing twenty-one Chinese illegal

immigrants to die:

Gangmaster Lin Liang Ren, 29, from Liverpool, is accused of 21 counts of
manslaughter which he denies. He is also charged with perverting the course of justice
with his girlfriend, Zhao Xiao Qing, and of conspiracy to facilitate illegal immigration.
An hour later, the jurors were taken out to watch the tide coming in and covering the
sand. They remained on the hovercraft and were shown the Kent and Keer channels and









how the water quickly filled them up and covered the cockle beds.

These articles not only viewed the victims sympathetically, but also showed the

"gangmaster" as someone who exploits illegal immigrants and that this exploitation is what led

to their deaths. This could also be seen as being positive of illegal immigrants in the sense that

they are definitely negative to those who would seek to in some way exploit them.

The Daily Telegraph had articles concerning tragedies involving illegal immigrants as

well, though there are fewer of them, six in all. Nearly all of the articles, five in all, were of the

story concerning the Chinese immigrants who died at the hands, or due to the neglect, of the

"gangmaster." These articles were similarly negative towards the "gangmaster" and

predominantly followed the murder trial of the gangmaster. These articles while sympathetic of

the victims were much more likely to be about the trial than the victims themselves:

Some managed to swim to safety or were rescued but at least 21 were drowned,"
Tim Holroyde, QC, prosecuting, told the jury at Preston Crown Court. "It is the
prosecution case that their deaths were caused by the criminal negligence of Lin Liang
Ren. He was responsible for them and he completely failed to take proper care for their
safety as they worked in the cold and dark."
On the second day of Lin's trial at Preston Crown Court, Timothy Holroyde, QC,
prosecuting, summed up the cocklers' predicament as "truly dreadful". He said: "They
were far from home and unable to speak sufficient English to summon help, in the cold
and dark, with no obvious route back to shore even if they could swim and with the water
rising swiftly and inexorably." The tragedy might have been even worse. "Seventy
Chinese workers had been due to travel to the bay from Liverpool that night but they had
insufficient transport," Mr. Holroyde said. Only Lin's workers made the trip.

The other article concerning an illegal immigrant tragedy was one that did not appear in

The Guardian concerning illegal immigrants attempting to enter Spain. These individuals

apparently have tried to enter through other countries in more hospitable areas, but have been

caught by Algerian or Moroccan authorities and dropped them off on a 140 mile stretch of

desert:









They were almost all young men in their twenties from countries as varied as
Mali, Cameroon, Congo, Gambia, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and
Senegal. Despite their different origins, they had one experience in common: they had all
been rounded up by Moroccan police and abandoned in the desert. Exhausted, some sick
and all suffering from hunger, they also had one common goal: to reach Oujda without
being caught by the police. There they can continue their journey to Europe and join the
ranks of what Spain regards as an invading army of illegal migrants, or beat a retreat and
head home via Algeria. All feared that, if caught before Oujda, they would be returned to
the desert where dozens of their fellow travelers are believed to have perished. All were
survivors of a mass expulsion of immigrants heading towards Europe that Moroccan
security forces began a week ago.

Racism

There were thirteen articles concerning racism in the Guardian and all of them took an

anti-racist view, and many of them associated the politics of the Tory Party as well as the British

National Party (BNP). Most of the articles were concerned with the potential immigration

policies if the Tory Party were to return to power and the use of fear of other races as part of

their campaigning strategy. In contrast there was only one article in The Daily Telegraph

concerning racism, and its main concern was that there was a fear of the police to be accused of

being racist and thus preventing them from profiling based on race.

Seven of the thirteen articles concerning race in The Guardian contained references to

negative tactics by the Tories and BNP towards immigration policies and associated their views

of immigration as having racial undertones.

"Asylum and immigration" are the public words that tell of unspoken passions on
race, Britishness, Islam and other things winked and nudged at in "Are you think what
we're thinking?"
Many Australians watching the current campaign in the UK are wondering how
low Crosby will go. For a start, he's employing the same script as in the Australian
election of 2001. He suggested that Australia was being "invaded" by illegal refugees and
asylum seekers who were said to have direct links with terrorism.
The far-right British National party is claiming that Africans are being paid up to
50,000 to move into its number one target seat to protect the majority of a government
minister. The party has poured activists from the south of England, Scotland and
Northern Ireland into Barking, the east London seat that the children's minister, Margaret
Hodge, holds with a 9,500 majority. Voters are being canvassed by 50- to 60-strong
teams of BNP activists and targeted with a series of inflammatory leaflets.










These articles present a picture of conservative politics in Britain using race and

connecting race and ethnicity to being "British" in an effort to gain and advantage in their

elections. This extreme form of nationalism and its effective use implies that there are people

who this tactic will work on. This is not likely the target audience of The Guardian and thus it is

interesting to show how they use this connection being made by the more conservative parties

between race and immigration to look at the opposition parties negatively.

There was also an interesting article looking at the fact that the Tory party's choice for

Prime Minister. Michael Howard was the son of an immigrant himself. They question why this

is not brought up considering the party's rhetoric against the then current immigration policies

and a desire to make immigration more difficult. The article also accuses Howard of using race

as a way to galvanize people around making immigration more difficult, especially for asylum

seekers who often arrive from African and Middle Eastern countries.

The rest of the articles were centered around the need for illegal immigrants as part of

maintaining a certain standard of living, and that most attempts to prevent immigration or illegal

immigrants were due to racist and/or nationalistic ideologies:

Have you ever thought about what Britain would look like if the effects of
postwar migration were suddenly reversed? Tellingly, most of parliament, our corporate
boardrooms and newspaper editorial meetings would look much the same. But quite how
these people would get to work, as public transport in most major cities stalled and
minicabs became scarce is another matter.
Economically, without the huge pool of cheap labour emanating from the
developing world, documented or not, we simply could not function as we do at present.
Politically, if Britain's last election campaign is anything to go by, without scapegoating
and marginalizing that same pool of labour it appears our political culture would be
unable to function. So we are left despising the very people on whom we depend, and
immigrants are left with the worst of all worlds economically exploited and socially
demonized. Vulnerable to unscrupulous employers, opportunistic politicians and racist
hatemongers, they work simply to exist in a place where their very existence has become
an affront.









These articles focused primarily on the exploitation of illegal immigrants not only in their labor

but as using them as political pawns in power struggle between the Labour and Tory parties.

This "double bind" leaves illegal immigrants and even guest workers in the predicament of being

fearful of not only being exploited but of being ignored by the only people with the ability to

help them, namely the British government.

The lone article overtly talking about race in the Daily Telegraph was concerning the

author's belief in the need for ethnic/racial profiling. The author believed that the police were

fearful of being called racist and thus were not doing their job effectively when dealing with

minorities:

The fight against terrorism is being hampered because a growing number of
police officers are reluctant to stop and search suspects of foreign appearance, a Police
Federation leader said yesterday... officers were often reluctant to challenge foreign-
looking people for fear of attracting racism complaints which might threaten their career.

In the authors view the reluctance of police to appear racist has hampered the ability of Britain to

protect itself from a number of problems, illegal immigration, terrorism, and crime in general.

Law and Order

Issues concerning law and order immigration policies comprised, by far, the largest single

theme for both newspapers with a total of thirty articles concerning law and order in The

Guardian and forty-eight in The Daily Telegraph. It is important to note that there was not a

single negative article concerning law and order approaches in the Daily Telegraph while there

were eleven in The Guardian. There were only five positive articles about law and order tactics

and policies in The Guardian, whereas there were forty positive articles in The Daily Telegraph.

Finally, there were fourteen neutral articles in The Guardian and Eight in The Daily Telegraph.

The negative articles in The Guardian primarily revolved around incidents in detention

centers that the authors felt were a direct result of law and order policies, and negative views of









using law and order policies for "controlling boarders." There were a series of problems exposed

in detention centers where those who were denied amnesty or otherwise caught in Britain

illegally were sent pending deportation. There were several articles about the detention center

Harmondsworth where poor conditions led to a "riot" by those in detention.

The prison inspection team says it had serious concerns over the way
Harmondsworth was run by United Kingdom Detention Service, with 44% of detainees
reporting they had been victimized by staff and 60% saying they felt unsafe in the centre.
More than 2,000 failed asylum seekers and illegal migrants pass through
Harmondsworth each year and those interviewed by the prison inspectors described the
custody officers as "aggressive", "intimidating", "rude" and "unhelpful", especially
towards those who could not speak English.

These articles were highly critical of the conditions faced by those detained at

Harmondsworth and there were similar articles concerning the use of "gangmasters" which are

licensed by the state. These "gangmasters" are sanctioned to work with immigrants in areas such

as agriculture and fishing where immigrants are typically housed on-site.

While the Gangmasters Licensing Act (due to come into force next month) was
debated in the aftermath of the Morecambe Bay tragedy and a crackdown was carried out
against illegal Chinese immigration, gang-labour exploitation continued. Now Polish
workers are working under similar conditions to the Chinese. Led by Polish gangmasters,
the workers, with no experience at sea, confide that the worst thing about the work is the
lack of safety. Nothing has changed.

These articles were also very negative towards the fishing industry which employed and

profited from the use of migrant workers and "gangmasters."

There were also articles concerning policy and debate which The Guardian viewed

negatively. The main argument concerned the general elections where authors from The

Guardian felt that the Labour party was being drawn "rightward" by the more conservative Tory

party as well as the NBP.

The very fact that the Labour government is about to announce a package of
detailed immigration policies will be enough to put the wind up some of its supporters.
Nothing that Charles Clarke can say today will dispel some of these critics' suspicions









that, merely by addressing the immigration question at all, the government is pandering
to a rightwing agenda set by the tabloid press and worse. The fact that the tempo is so
obviously being set by a Conservative party that seems unable to get electoral traction
any other way only strengthens these concerns.

The idea that the debate on immigration was being dragged to the right was a common theme

even in The Guardian articles concerning race.

The neutral law and order articles concerned mainly reporting of stories with law and

order themes without giving them a positive or negative "spin." These were articles where the

author was reporting rather than attempting to change opinion. Many of these had to do with

announcements from the government or the political parties concerning policies and potential

policies concerning immigration, such as a report by the government that there would be an

addition 400 officers assigned to locate illegal immigrants. While this may be a law and order

approach to dealing with illegal immigrants it was not portrayed positively or negatively by the

author. Another interesting article described a new way the government was considering

deporting illegal immigrants or those denied asylum:

Britain is to take part in a plan to organize joint charter flights to deport illegal
immigrants across Europe, the home secretary, Charles Clarke, confirmed yesterday.
Interior ministers from France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK, agreed to organize
charter flights that will pick up illegal migrants in each country before flying them home.
The scheme will effectively set up a discrete charter airline, already dubbed "migrant-
air", that will cut the cost of deportations and reduce the need to send those being
deported back home on commercial airlines.

Though they were fewer, neutral articles from The Daily Telegraph were similar in that

they mainly concerned policy announcements from the various political parties during the

election and various statements made by the government concerning reports on the number of

illegal immigrants and government reports concerning illegal immigration or immigration in

general. Almost half of the articles reported on a new law that would allow businesses to be

fined for employing illegal immigrants, for example:









According to The Sunday Telegraph, John Reid, the Home Secretary, is
considering tougher sanctions on directors whose companies give work to the estimated
570,000 foreigners illegally in Britain.
A new Immigration and Asylum Bill, the fourth since 1997, aims to make it easier
to penalize firms, gangmasters and employment agencies which knowingly employ large
numbers of illegal immigrants. They face a criminal prosecution resulting in a two-year
prison sentence.

There were five articles in The Guardian which were considered pro law and order.

These articles generally argued that there needed to be more done in order to prevent illegal

immigrants from entering, and that due to current policies it is easier in Britain to gain entry and

stay illegally than in most Western countries. These articles while not critical of illegal

immigrants were critical of policies that did little to prevent people from overstaying visas and of

the policy that enables people from more countries to enter without a visa:

The UK has the most generous visa arrangements of any western developed
country, a situation that could aid illegal immigration, the conference heard.
Britain demands visas for visitors from 104 countries, compared with 132 for most other
European countries, 158 for the US and 161 for Australia.
"The UK knows perfectly well it will bring more illegal immigrants, but it wants
to cling to its relationships with its former colonies," he said.
Passport holders from rich nations faced the fewest restrictions. Dr Neumayer said the
study showed that rich countries systematically use visa restrictions to keep out visitors
from countries that are poor, undemocratic and experience violent conflict. At the same
time, citizens from those richer countries are enjoying much better access to poorer
countries.

These articles talk much less about what is traditionally thought of as "border security" such as

an increase in the number of officers dedicated to removing illegal immigrants, these were

mainly concerned with how illegal immigrants enter the country rather than how to remove them

or any negative implications of having a large population of illegal immigrants.

The Daily Telegraph on the other hand viewed law and order very positively and authors

openly supported the more conservative policies of the Tories and often heavily criticized the

Labour party for being lax on immigration, particularly illegal immigration. One of the more









interesting frames was that while the Guardian viewed the debate moving rightward, The Daily

Telegraph viewed it as "coming together."

In many ways, the policies of the two major parties are coming together. After
presiding over record levels of immigration, the Government intends to introduce a
points-based system next year that will seek to attract only those who make a positive
contribution to the economy while effectively shutting the door to low-skilled workers
from outside the EU.

Whereas The Guardian saw this change in the Labour party moving to more restrictive policies

as a negative, one author in The Daily Telegraph saw the move by the Tories of dropping the

idea for making the reunification of families more difficult, as a positive step towards

compromise.

There was also a great deal of ridicule by authors in The Daily Telegraph that the British

government does not know how many illegal immigrants are in Britain. One of the Home Office

employees made a statement that he was unsure how many illegal immigrants were in Britain,

and the Daily Telegraph ridiculed the office and the Labour party for being "clueless" on illegal

immigration, and finally all but accused the Home Office of lying during the election after the

government finally did release estimates concerning the number of illegal immigrants in Britain:

The number of illegal immigrants living in Britain could be as high as 570,000 or
as low as 310,000, the government said yesterday when it published the first official
figures on the subject. The Home Office report follows Tony Blair's insistence during
the election campaign that it was impossible to provide an estimate. Interviewed on
Newsnight during the campaign he refused to give a precise figure, despite being pressed
18 times by Jeremy Paxman to do so.

The majority of articles were critical of the Labour party and Tony Blair over

immigration policy and not deporting illegal immigrations in a timely manner. They argued that

illegal immigrants were lost track of and that the government outright ignored tips concerning

illegal immigrants:









The Home Office was accused last night of ignoring tip-offs about illegal
migrants working in the black economy. Employment agencies said they had told the
Immigration Service of people with false papers but it took no action.

Several articles seemed to revel at what their authors perceived as incompetence on the part of

the Home Office:

In most weeks, the news that the Home Office had accidentally repealed an
extremely important law would have caused quite a stir. Yesterday, however, the fact that
it may now be perfectly legal to carry a forged passport, because of yet another blunder
by this most chaotic department of state, made only a short item on page six of my
edition of The Daily Telegraph. We have all become so used to tales of monstrous
incompetence dangerous criminals lost without trace, no attempts made to trace illegal
immigrants or to enforce deportation orders that we greet each new instance of bungling
with a weary shrug: "Oh, well, it's New Labour's Home Office. What do you expect?"

While most of the articles were highly critical of Labour, there were a couple of articles

that supported the efforts of Tony Blair, which seems to indicate that he had capitulated to the

conservative movement towards greater isolationism, at least in isolating Britain from the poorer

and more unskilled immigrants of the world.

Other Countries Immigration Policies

There were many articles in both newspapers which looked at immigration policies in

other countries in either negative or neutral ways, none of the articles reflected positive frames of

immigration policies in other countries. Both newspapers had an equal number of both negative

and neutral articles with six neutral articles and six negative articles in The Guardian and five

neutral and six negative articles in The Daily Telegraph. There were differences between the

two newspapers on why they portrayed various policies negatively, and on the type of neutral

articles they published.

The Guardian's negative articles usually looked at the law and order type approaches to

immigration policies. Most of the articles looked at a plan to deport large numbers of illegal

immigrants or to increase boarder security instead of offering increased immigration as a way of









combating illegal immigration. The authors seemed to take the view that the best way to prevent

illegal immigration is to expand existing immigration so that those entering the country would no

longer be considered illegal. For example, they were highly critical of a French raid on an

abandoned building known for housing both illegal and legal African immigrants:

Up to 1,000 squatters, including 200 children, many from Ivory Coast, Mali and
Senegal, were crammed into 300 small student rooms with improvised wiring, poor
sanitation and damp. But only half were asylum seekers or illegal immigrants. The rest
had legal status to remain in France but, support groups said, they could not find housing
because of racism and discrimination.

As shown in this article, the authors imply race as a motivating factor, and they do this in

other articles looking at policies or crackdowns in other countries. For example, one article

looked at Spain's guest worker program and argued that while Spain was increasing their guest

worker program they were offering the visas to non African countries, which is where the

majority of their illegal immigration originates from.

Spain is to hire 180,000 immigrants in their countries of origin next year in an
effort to stem illegal immigration while satisfying its demand for cheap labour. But just
75 people will be recruited from Senegal, from where thousands of migrants set sail this
year in packed wooden fishing boats for the Canary Islands many drowning in the
attempt... But he said it was hard to make a case for recruiting in sub-Saharan Africa.
"It's much further, integration is more difficult and businesses want the easiest solution,"
he said.

Of the six negative articles in The Daily Telegraph there were actually two which

frowned upon the law and order approach to dealing with illegal immigrants by other countries.

One of these was a look at the idea percolating in Australia concerning using armed "prison"

type ships to detain and hold illegal fishermen also referred to as "boat people." The article

refers to the use of boats to send the original "settlers" of Australia, criminals from Britain and

argues that Australia is looking to it's "convict origins."









There were also negative articles concerning a lack of law and order policies in other

countries. They were particularly harsh concerning Spain, arguing that they would be releasing

1,500 illegal immigrants into Europe:

But, under its liberal immigration laws, illegal migrants can be held for a
maximum of 40 days. If officials then fail to establish their nationality, or discover that
they come from a country such as Mali which has no repatriation agreement with Spain,
they must be released. Most illegal arrivals will therefore have to be set free, officials
said. Once released on the Spanish mainland, the migrants can make their way through
continental Europe because of the border-free Schengen zone.

Unlike The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph published articles critical of Frances

immigration policies, not because they were too harsh, but because they were too lenient, and

they portrayed the squatters that were evicted, which was mention in one of The Guardian

articles, as being a blight on the French government. They were a blight, not because of how the

government treated them, but because there were so many illegal immigrants involved that the

author believed should not have been there to begin with.

The six neutral articles in The Guardian and five neutral articles in The Daily Telegraph

were similar in their reporting. The neutral articles of both newspapers, focused mainly on

France and Spain. They focused on the upcoming elections in France and the center-right

candidate who wants stronger boarder controls throughout Europe, and the more liberal Spanish

government which granted amnesty to over 700,000 illegal immigrants. One of the articles in

The Guardian reported on a speech given by Nikolas Sarkozy the center-right candidate in

France criticizing the amnesty by Spain's government:

France and Spain have become embroiled in a row over immigration after the
French interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, criticized the Spanish government for an
immigration amnesty that saw 580,000 foreigners receive work and residency papers last
year. Mr. Sarkozy, who is expected to fight for France's presidency on a centre-right
ticket next year, said the socialist government of the Spanish Prime Minister, Jose Luis
Rodriguez Zapatero, had been encouraging illegal immigrants to breach Europe's
frontiers.









While The Daily Telegraph did not report on the back and forth between France and

Spain concerning Spain's amnesty, they did report on policies put forth by Sarkozky concerning

illegal immigrants in France:

Nicolas Sarkozy, France's interior minister and presidential hopeful, has unveiled
tougher rules on immigration, making it easier to expel foreign workers or those refusing
to integrate. Immigrants applying for lengthy stays would have to respect a list of
obligations as part of a new "contract of welcome and integration". These include
learning French and actively looking for a job.

It is interesting to note that the neutral articles of The Guardian focused mainly on amnesty in

Spain, a human interest story in France and the spat between the two countries, The Daily

Telegraph's articles focused mainly on the law and order policies of France and the amnesty in

Spain.

Exploitation of Illegal Immigrants

Exploitation of illegal immigrants was much more prevalent in The Guardian, twelve

articles, than in The Daily Telegraph which had only two articles. These articles concerned the

exploitation of workers ranging from working in the agricultural sectors to the sex trade in

Britain. These articles placed illegal immigrants in a sympathetic light, which is likely why there

were so many more articles in The Guardian than The Daily Telegraph.

Three of the articles in The Guardian looked at the sex trade and the exploitation of

women by human trafficking in Britain. These articles were pressing for the government to take

a more law and order approach to the problem, though this is difficult because many of the

women enter the country legally, lured by individuals claiming to be hiring officials and getting

the women work papers. Once in country however, they find that their lives and bodies are no

longer their own:


In a disturbing picture of the violence suffered by the women, some of whom are
as young as 15, officers have accounts of them being raped, threatened, stripped of









passports and forced into underground brothels on arrival in the UK. Many have been
tempted to the UK by promises of a lucrative summer job; others have come after
trafficking gangs posing as employment agencies insisted their parents sign consent
forms to permit them to travel.

These articles show these women sympathetically and recognize the difficulty of ending the

problem since many do enter legally.

While there were three articles concerning the sex trade, there were nine articles

concerning the exploitation of workers. These mainly focused on big businesses knowingly

employing illegal immigrants primarily for cheep labor. The main problem being that illegal

immigrants do not have any protection under the law since they are in the country illegally.

They have the choice to be exploited by businesses or to face deportation. They cannot go to the

government for assistance, and big businesses, especially in agriculture, fishing and construction

rely on this fear of deportation as a way to control their workers:

The companies most likely to employ illegal migrants are also the ones most
likely to fiddle their tax and national insurance, drive people round the countryside in
dangerous vehicles, ignore employment rights and undercut the minimum wage.
Although illegal workers are the most vulnerable, few of these employers only employ
illegals. Their exploitation is shared by legal migrants and the most vulnerable people
from the British workforce.

Many of the articles pushed for equal rights for all workers regardless of their

immigration status. The argument being that no matter what ones visa status workers should all

have equal rights. These articles also point to the violence both physical and psychological that

both illegal and legal immigrants must deal with because of their precarious positions in low-

skill jobs which the individual is generally easily replaced:

Supermarkets, catering chains and processing plants are accused of allowing a
system dependent on subcontracted labour to continue which permits not only abuse and
underpayment of foreign workers, but also identity fraud, large-scale tax avoidance,
crime and violence. Most important of all, several months of in depth interviews with
illegal migrant workers show how vulnerable they are to exploitation, intimidation and
abuse.










The two articles in The Daily Telegraph also portrayed exploitation of illegal immigrants

negatively and the victims sympathetically. One of the articles focused on child slavery, and the

other was a story of a pastor who paid "slave wages" to illegal immigrant builders. While the

story on child slavery portrayed the victims, in a sympathetic light, the other story focused more

on the pastor and the illegality of his actions rather than looking at the workers in a more

sympathetic way, an example from the article concerning the pastor:

The leader of a newly-formed evangelist church was preparing to face his
congregation last night to explain why he illegally shipped a group of African workers
into Britain so that they could help build his house on "slave wages."

The story on child slavery portrayed the children positively and their smugglers as

"ruthless" and described how parents often paid the smugglers taking their children because they

believed they were going to live a better life.

The victims are smuggled into Britain or brought in on false passports by adults
posing as relatives. They are put to work immediately, live in appalling conditions and
are subjected to physical and sexual abuse.

The article also places blame on the government for not doing enough to tackle the problem, and

for the lax enforcement of border security as well as for punishing the children by deporting

them, oftentimes leading to them being smuggled into the country once again.

Temporary Workers and Amnesty

This category concerning temporary workers and amnesty was the theme with the fewest

number of articles. There were three positive, and two neutral in The Guardian, and one positive

one neutral, and two negative in The Daily Telegraph for a total of nine articles. This was also

the most specific theme, while others, such as the articles concerning exploitation varied on the

topics covered within the theme, these were very specific. It is also important to note that there









were no negative articles concerning guest workers or amnesty in The Guardian, while there

were two negative articles in The Daily Telegraph.

The positive articles in The Guardian included one looking at temporary workers and two

looking at potential amnesty for illegal immigrants. The article about temporary workers

focused mainly on immigrants from Poland looking for work and because of Poland's entrance

into the EU potential workers can now enter freely. However, because they are not British

citizens, they do not qualify for any benefits, even homeless shelters turn them away because of

their status:

But recent Polish immigration has also caused a range of problems, perhaps
mostly poignantly for Poles themselves. "We help a lot of Poles who sleep rough in
London when they first arrive," says Jan Moktzycki, president of the Federation of Poles
in Great Britain. "If a newly arrived Pole tries to check into a homelessness shelter they
will be told that they cannot stay because they are not allowed to receive benefits, which
includes staying in a shelter. I think that is inhumane."

These workers are referred to as temporary workers because they are expected to return

to Poland in a relatively short period of time because of the lack of government support. The

theory goes that if people are not helped by the government, then they will not be able to

maintain manageable standard of living and send money back to family members, and thus they

will likely return. Of course this is a rather cynical view and one could also argue that they are

simply attempting to save enough money to provide a higher standard of living in their home

country.

The articles concerning amnesty focused on immigrants creating a new life in Britain.

They would no longer have to work in the shadows and be exploited by employers who take

advantage of their illegal status through low wages and poor working conditions. The concern is

also about the contribution that illegal immigrants make to the economy. They provide labor for

wages far below what national citizens would earn.









Any new system will not work if no action is taken to address the issue of people
already working in Britain undocumented or in breach of immigration conditions. The
sheer numbers involved make it obvious that any proposal to deport them all is simply
impractical. Some badly paid sectors of the economy would be facing labour shortages if
this were to be attempted.

The lone positive article in The Daily Telegraph was concerning temporary workers.

This article notes that while borders may be open for travel, countries have no obligations to

allow people entering the country to work within those borders. However, the article talks about

Britain being one of only three countries in the EU to open it's workplace up to Easter European

countries like Poland. All other countries place barriers to work or strict quotas on the number of

workers from Easter European countries, however as the reporter notes those barriers must come

down by 2010 and Britain likely has a distinct advantage when this happens because:

By opening their borders from the start, it seems reasonable to assume that
Britain, Ireland and Sweden have landed the cream of the new member states' crop the
workers with the most get up and go, the best English language skills, and those who
want to make an honest go of their new lives.

Both of the neutral articles in The Guardian looked at temporary workers, These articles

mainly gave demographics concerning which of the new EU countries these workers were

coming from, the types of jobs they were entering into and totals for the number of new

immigrant workers. For example this Guardian article states that:

The latest figures also show that by June this year, a total of 447,000 eastern
Europeans had registered to work in Britain since May 2004 when Poland and seven
other mainly former communist states joined the European Union. Most have come from
Poland 264,000 and more than 82% are young, aged 18 to 34, with no dependents.

The neutral article in The Daily Telegraph looked at amnesty for illegal immigrants. This article

gave estimates as to how many illegal immigrants would be given, and the reasons that those

who are backing amnesty are giving for granting amnesty. The author notes a report from the









government stating how much extra revenue would be generated through taxes paid by newly

legalized workers, as well as the cost of deporting illegal immigrants:

Britain's 500,000 illegal immigrants should be granted an "amnesty" and allowed
to apply for work permits in a move that would net around 1 billion a year for the
Treasury in extra taxes... The bill for deporting each immigrant, based on the cost of
enforced removal of asylum seekers, would be 11,000 per individual, meaning a total
bill of 4.7 billion.

The sole negative article was in The Daily Telegraph and dealt with amnesty as well.

This article looks at the perceived consequences of amnesty. For example the author argues

there would be anger from other EU countries because once the illegal immigrants were made

citizens they could freely enter other EU countries. The article uses this quote that sums up one

of the authors main arguments against amnesty:

"It will not solve the problem; it will make it worse. It is an active incentive for
people to come here illegally." David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "With our
borders so badly protected, even speculating about an amnesty is highly irresponsible. An
amnesty could lead to a massive, uncontrolled increase in the numbers coming here."









CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

The primary expectation from the beginning of this project was that since public opinion

towards illegal immigrants in Britain was predominantly negative, then the articles printed in

popular newspapers would be negative as well. Since it was shown that public opinion is

affected by newspaper articles, especially for salient issues that the public is already aware of,

such as illegal immigration, it was expected that the number of negatively framed articles would

outnumber the number of articles that were framed in a more understanding light. The term

understanding is used as apposed to using the word "positive" to describe the articles that were

not framed negatively because those articles though not framed negatively, did not attribute

positive aspects to illegal immigration. The articles portrayed a more humanistic or

understanding framing of illegal immigrants and the exploitation and tragedy that they face. The

best light that illegal immigrants were portrayed in was as victims, either of exploitation or

tragedy, but very rarely even in those circumstances were they ever truly "positively" portrayed.

While there were less negatively framed articles than anticipated, the differences between

the newspapers were more in line with expectations. The Guardian in particular was in line with

expectations, with negatively framed articles representing only 17 percent of the total sampled,

and positively framed articles represented 49 percent of the total, with the remaining 34 percent

being neutral. It was not surprising to find that there were nearly three times as many positively

framed articles than negatively framed articles in The Guardian since the Guardian is considered

a more politically left leaning newspaper

The findings for the Daily Telegraph were also in line with expectations, with 58 percent

of all articles being framed negatively, and only 12.5 percent of the articles were framed in a

more positive, or understanding way. The remaining 29.5 percent were considered neutral. This









is a larger difference than that found in The Guardian with almost five times more negative

articles than positive.

One explanation for this higher proportion is that The Daily Telegraph staff views illegal

immigration as more of a "problem" that The Guardian views it as a situation to be sympathized

with. Another explanation would be that The Daily Telegraph is simply a more political

newspaper than The Guardian, or that The Guardian is more subtle in their reporting, thus using

less opinion and more statistical information and quotations of government officials to make

articles appear more neutral. The fact that there was an election in 2005 likely played a role in

the number of articles in each of the newspapers, as well as why there were more neutral articles

in The Guardian than in The Daily Telegraph. If The Daily Telegraph is a more political

newspaper than The Guardian, then it is understandable that there would be fewer neutral articles

and a larger difference between the number of articles sympathetic to illegal immigration and

those that portrayed it in a more negative light. Though this is somewhat contradicted by the fact

that immigration, illegal or otherwise, is a very hot button issue and there were more articles total

in the sample from The Guardian than The Daily Telegraph.

One of the more interesting findings was that there were thirteen articles in The Guardian

looking at racism in the public discourse on illegal immigration, while there was only one in The

Daily Telegraph. Each of the articles in The Guardian decried the use of what they often referred

to as "race baiting" by the conservative parties when attempting to gather support for their anti-

immigration rhetoric. On the other hand the only article in The Daily Telegraph discussing race

was more concerned that the police would not do their jobs properly for fear of being called

racist. These are very different views of the importance of race in the immigration debate and

show the differences in ideologies between the newspapers.









Along similar lines, the differences between the newspaper on policy issues, especially

those of "border enforcement" and deportation. Articles concerning law and order policies and

approaches represented almost half of all of the articles in The Daily Telegraph sample, and forty

of the forty-eight articles framed these policies in a positive way, eight were framed in a neutral

way, and none of the articles framed law and order approaches in a negative light. On the other

hand there were thirty articles in The Guardian representing less than thirty percent of the total,

and of those articles only five framed these policies in a positive light, where eleven framed them

in a negative way. These differences, once again display their ideological differences between

the newspapers in the political realm.

Illegal immigration is such an important topic that there needs to be further research done

on its portrayal in the media. A larger sample of articles would likely be beneficial, perhaps

spanning over a two year period, or during a non-election year to mediate the political effect of

an election on everyday portrayal of illegal immigrants in the media. This could possibly

provide a more representative sample of what is "normally" represented in the media without the

politically charged atmosphere of an impending election.









LIST OF REFERENCES


Appleyard, R. 2001. "International Migration Policies: 1950-2000." International
Migration 39(6): 7-20.

Bade, Klaus J. 2004. "Legal and Illegal Immigration into Europe: Experiences and
Challenges." European Review 12(3): 339-375.

Burstein, Paul, 2003. "The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and
An Agenda." Public Opinion Quarterly 56(1): 29-40.

Creed, D. E., Langstraat, J.A., and Scully, M.A. 2002. "A Picture of the Frame: Frame
Analysis as Technique and as Politics." Organizational Research Methods 5(1):
34-55.

Dimitrova, Daniela V. and Stromback, Jasper. 2005. "Mission Accomplished?:
Framing of the Iraq War in the Elite Newspapers in Sweden and the United
States." International Journal for Communications Studies 67(5): 399-417.

De Vreese, Claes J., and Boomgaarden, Hajo G. 2005. "Projecting EU Referendums."
European Union Politics 6(1): 59-82.

Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn 1998. "International Norm Dynamics and
Political Change." International Organization 52: 887-917.

Gamson, W.A. and Lasch, K.E. 1983. "The Political culture of Social Welfare Policy" In
S.E Spiro and E. Yuchtman-Yaar (Ed.). Evaluating the Welfare State: SoOcial
and Political Perspectives pp. 397-415. New York: Academic Press.

House of Commons (HC) "1985 Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules."
HC503. London: House of Commons.

Jordan, Donald L. 1993. "Newspaper Effects on Policy Preferences." "The Public
Opinion Quarterly 57(2): 191-204.

King, Russell. 2002. "Towards a New Map of European Migration." International
Journal ofPopulation Geography 8: 89-106.

Luedtke, Adam. 2005. "European Immigration, Public Opinion, and Immigration
Policy." European Union Politics 6(1): 83-112.

Morris, Lydia. 1998. "Governing at a Distance: The Elaboration of Controls in British
Immigration." International Migration Review 32(4): 949-973.

Page, Benjamin I., Shapiro, Robert, Y., and Dempsey, Glenn R. 1987. "What Moves
Public Opinion?" American Political Science Review 81: 23-44.










Pan, Zhongdang and Kosicki, Gerald M. 1993. "Frame Analysis: An Approach to News
Discourse." Political Communications 80: 55-75.

Payne, Rodger A. 2001. "Persuasion, Frames and Norm Construction." European
Journal ofInternational Relations 7(1): 37-61.

Rowlands, Ian, Eisenschitz, Tamara, and Bawden, David 2001. "Frame Analysis as a
Tool for Understanding Information Policy." Journal ofInformation Science 28: 31-
38.

Saggar, Shamit. 2003. "Immigration and the Politics of Public Opinion." The Political
Quarterly 178-194.

Segvic, Ivana. 2005. "The Framing of Politics: A Content Analysis of Three Croatian
Newspapers." The International Journal for Communication Studies 67(5):
469-488.

Simon, Rita J. and Lynch, James P 1999. "A Comparative Assessment of Public
Opinion Toward Immigrants and Immigration Policies." International Migration
Review 33(2): 455-467.

Soroka, Stuart N. 2003. "Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy." Press and
Politics 3(1): 27-48.

The Daily Telegraph. January 2005- November 2005. London England.

The Guardian. January 2005- November 2005. London England.

Van Gorp, Baldwin. 2005. "Where is the Frame?: Victims and Intruders in the Belgian
Press Coverage of the Asylum Issue." European Journal of Communication
20(4): 484-507.

Van Dijk, T.A. 1988. News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Yanovitsky, Itzhak. 2002. "Effects of News Coverage on Policy Attention and Actions."
Communication Research 29(4): 422-451









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Beau Niles is a third year sociology graduate student. His research interests include media

influence on society as well as racial inequality in the United States. These interests have led to

research on newspaper portrayal of immigration, especially illegal immigration. He earned his

Bachelor of Arts in Sociology and Psychology at Cornell College. He will receive his Master of

Arts in Sociology in the Summer of 2007.





PAGE 1

1 A QUALITATIVE FRAME ANALYSIS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IN TWO BRITISH NEWSPAPERS By BEAU NILES A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE O F MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Beau Niles

PAGE 3

3 For Sara, Jacob, and Ala na, thank you for your patience

PAGE 4

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 5 CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................6 British Fears of Illegal Immi gration ................................ ................................ ......................... 6 Media Influence on Public Opinion and Public Policy ................................ .......................... 10 Public Opinion and Immigration Policy ................................ ................................ ................. 12 2 METHODS AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ....................... ........................................17 3 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 21 ID Cards ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 21 United States Illegal Immigration ................................ ................................ ........................... 24 Tragedy Stories ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 29 Racism ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 31 Law and Order ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 33 Other Countries Immigration Policies ................................ ................................ .................... 38 Exploitation of Illegal Immigrants ................................ ................................ .......................... 41 Temporary Workers and Amnesty ................................ ................................ .......................... 43 4 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ...................... 47 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 50 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 52

PAGE 5

5 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts A QUALITATIVE FRAME ANALYSIS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IN TWO BRITISH By Beau Niles August 2007 Chair: Constance Shehan Major: Sociology Illegal immigration into Britain has become a rallying cry for nationalistic political parties. Newspaper articles have been shown to influence the salience of political issues, and thus it is im portant to look at how illegal immigration is framed and for the purposes of this paper two British newspapers were used: The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph. For this paper 212 articles were examined 108 from The Guardian and 104 from The Daily Telegra ph. These newspapers represent two different political viewpoints, The Guardian being the more liberal newspaper, and The Daily Telegraph being more conservative. Each of these newspapers framed both legal and illegal immigration in different ways. Fram e analysis was used to look at the messages these newspapers were sending their readers. The Guardian typically framed illegal and legal immigration in a more positive light, and The Daily Telegraph typically framed illegal and legal immigration more neg atively. The articles were coded based on the framing in which illegal immigration was presented. The specific frames found in the articles consisted of: ID Cards, United States Illegal Immigration, Tragedy, Racism, Law and Order, Articles about Other C ountries, Exploitation, Temporary Workers, and Amnesty

PAGE 6

6 CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW British Fears of Illegal Immigration Immigration to Western Europe did not begin in earnest until after World War II. The first wave of immigrants to Western Europe were mainly from Southern Europe and entered countries as gues t workers to help with reconstruction. These workers were expected to be temporary guest workers, who would help rebuild Western Europe, earn extra money and return to their countries of origin. This did not happen, however, and most of the migrants stay ed in the countries they had migrated to after forming a new life for themselves. This was not a problem while the economy was expanding and jobs were plentiful, but when the oil crisis hit, economies slowed and the need for migrant labor decreased. Th is downturn in the economy quickly led politicians to call for a tightening of immigration policy. Politicians quickly saw the problem of immigrants and other non citizens as employees in jobs that had become increasingly competitive. Public fears over jobs being taken by foreigners quickly led to more restrictive immigration policies in countries throughout Western Europe. Immigration in Western Europe has become increasingly politicized over the last decade. Efforts to curtail immigration have led to the notion of Fortress Europe. Many countries in Western Europe have enacted laws to curtail immigration and many have officially claimed to be non immigration countries, effectively saying that they will no longer welcome immigrants into their c ountries. With immigration on the increase during the late 1980s and early 1990s and with the elimination of internal boarders the isolation of a Fortress Europe from unwanted immigrants has gained momentum since the end of the cold war with the threa t of mass immigration from former communist countries (Bade 2004).

PAGE 7

7 Many immigration fears have stemmed from sensationalized stories of immigrants flooding into a country. Not only has the news media sensationalized the number of immigrants entering v arious Western European countries, but they have also sensationalized the threat of immigration from former communist countries. Though this mass immigration has yet to materialize, it has nonetheless become a perceived lingering threat. The sensationa lization of immigration by the media has helped shape public opinion against immigration. While immigrants make up only 7% of the total population of Great Britain only 6 percent of Britains believe that there are too few immigrants, while between 66 and 68 percent believe that there are too many (Simon and Lynch 1999). This climate of restricting immigration has led to an increase in undocumented workers. This unforeseen consequence has been the primary reason why illegal immigration has become one of the top political issues in Britain. Illegal immigration comes in many forms. From the visiting tourist who overstays their visa to the immigrant with no documentation who is oftentimes smuggled across the boarder for a fee. According to Bade 2004, mo st illegal immigrants enter the receiving country in one of four ways. The first form consists of those who enter the country legally, but then become illegal when they overstay their visas. The second form involves using forged documents to gain entry and employment into the receiving country. The third form consists of human smuggling. Immigrants with no documentation seek out an individual who can get them past whatever boarder security may exist in exchange for a fee, sometimes these go betweens a re referred to as travel agents. The final group consists those who are actual criminals that have been convicted of crimes in other countries and use immigrant enclaves as a means to cross into another country and escape jail or prosecution.

PAGE 8

8 Many have come to view the term illegal immigrant as derogatory and stigmatizing, lumping those who are looking for a better life with those who are attempting to flee prosecution or have fled once convicted of a crime. Those who do not like the term illegal im migrants usually prefer undocumented immigrants or undocumented workers. These are usually expressed across the political spectrum with those on the right preferring illegal immigrants while more those with more leftist views are likely to refer to undocumented immigrants. These political ideologies also effect how people interpret illegal or undocumented immigration. There are many ways of interpreting the growth of the illegal movement. For some it represents the growing undesirability of m ass migrations and the need to control and manage migration in the face of apparently increasing pressures for people to migrate. For others it is almost the reverse a reflection of the fact that the natural forces of migration will always overcome r egimes of control and containment (King 2002). The problem of distinction is also compounded by the fact that a legal worker may work in the illegal or informal sector, while an illegal worker may work in the legal or formal sector without problem. Thus, describing a worker as legal or illegal becomes much more difficult, but this does not stop the government from attempting to control its boarders and the number of immigrants it allows, especially during times of economic hardship. When undo cumented immigrants are perceived to be making a contribution to the receiving countries economy, they are generally tolerated, but when the economy is in recession or stagnant, this tolerance evaporates. The government typically places pressure on the il legal immigrants to leave. Governments also react to perceived negative effects of illegal immigrants, such as crime domestic violence, and undermining the dominant culture (Appleyard 2001). Many of these perceived negative effects are stereotypes that have been perpetuated by the media. British policy towards immigrants and illegal immigration has resulted in a habitual residency test for receiving public benefits, by 1980 benefits were not available to those defined

PAGE 9

9 as persons from abroad(Morris 1 998). One of the requirements of entry was the understanding that an immigrant would have no recourse to public funds. However, until 1985 this only applied to Income Support, but by 1985 public benefits were defined using new rules which stated: For the purpose of these rules the term public funds includes Supplementary Benefits, Housing Benefit, Family Income Supplement, and housing under the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977(HC503, para 1). However it remained unclear how to enforce these rul es and whether they were legally enforceable because they contradicted previous laws without repealing them, such as the Housing Act of 1977. The entry condition of no recourse to public funds did not of itself debar local authorities from offering home less provisions as this limitation was not cited in homeless legislation. Acceptance of such provision, however, could be viewed as a breach of conditions of entry, rebounding on the immigration status of the individual concerned and possibly triggering c harges against the authority for harboring an illegal immigrant (Morris 1998). This is just one example of the unforeseen consequences of hastily enacted policy. In their haste to enact laws that would deter and restrict immigration, the British governme nt did not foresee the enforcement problems that would ensue. This paper will look at the research on media influence on public opinion, how public opinion shapes public policy, and current media discourse on illegal immigration. The medias influence on public opinion gives it a unique ability to shape not only opinion, but through that opinion also have an influence over policy. Because there are difference along the political spectrum on how to deal with illegal immigration, the content analysis will look at two British newspapers The Guardian, representing the leftist side of the political spectrum, and The Daily Telegraph representing the right leaning side of the political spectrum. It is important to recognize both sides of the spectrum because cu rrently the left leaning Labour party is currently in power, and the right leaning Tories have attempted to use illegal immigration to make gains where leftist parties are generally perceived to be weak on illegal immigration. It is predicted

PAGE 10

10 that there will be a more understanding attitude towards illegal immigrants in the Guardian, while there is likely to be a more negative attitude portrayed in the articles from the Daily Telegraph. Media Influence on Public Opinion and Public Policy Aside from perso nal opinion, virtually all of the information that the public uses for their decision making and opinion forming comes from some source of media, and the media also represents much of policy makers information on public opinion. The mass media is the pr imary conduit between the public and policy makers; Policy makers follow the media trends in public opinion, and the media are the publics primary source of information on what the policy makers are doing (Soroka 2003). These mass media outlets may take the form of newspaper, television news, radio, and most recently the internet. The media has the power to determine what it will present to the public. In this way it can shape what is on the publics mind. The media, especially the major newspapers and news stations, such as the New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, etc., influence what other news outlets carry as well. When one of the major newspapers presents a story it is often picked up by local newspapers, and the same holds t rue for the major networks, the news gets broadcast through their affiliates and potentially makes its way to every television set in the country. Page and Shapiro (1984) went so far as to say that the news reported in the New York Times ultimately find s its way, in diluted form, through other newspapers, magazines, television news, and word of mouth to the general public, and in this way the New York Times may not be a bad indicator of the general thrust of the news that reaches the citizenry. Their a rticle demonstrates the effect that a single major newspaper can have on the rest of the media as well as the general population. Jordan (1993) also found that the content of the New York Times editorials correlated with television commentary indicating t hat the New York Times news may

PAGE 11

11 drive television agendas. Jordans findings indicate that major newspapers can have a significant influence on setting the agenda for what will become popular news and what is considered newsworthy. Jordans New York Tim es study also found that newspaper articles had a significant correlation with changes in attitudes towards the subject matter that the articles were written about. It is likely that the New York Times itself did not have this impact because a very small percentage of the American population reads the New York Times, as state before, however, many other newspapers pick up stories printed in the New York Times, as well as network and cable news channels. This potential influence by one publisher has many i mplications, such as who decides what gets printed? Soroka 2003 found that mass media plays a significant roll in driving public attention to foreign affairs, which indicates that the media can influence what the public becomes interested in. He found th at the changing importance of foreign affairs for the public is reflective in large part of the mass media content and that changes in public opinion towards foreign policy can have an impact on policy making. It is important to note, however, that many o f those who report on issues where public opinion may affect policy making may not be knowledgeable about the subject of which they are reporting on. This is especially true on complex issues such as immigration. With economic, social, and cultural aspec ts to consider it is likely that those who are writing the articles that could influence the public are not educated on the issue. With such a politically charged issue, some write articles with an ideological agenda using hot button terms with the specif ic intent of changing public opinion toward their ideological preference. This has important public policy implications because policy makers also use the media to gauge public opinion. The issues that are presented in the media and the manner in which

PAGE 12

12 t hey are presented can influence policy makers because they may believe that the media is portraying an issue is indicative of public opinion. At the very least policy makers are likely to believe that the media through their portrayals are influencing pub lic opinion thus driving policy makers to adopt policies that they perceive as being what the public wants based on what the media is portraying. This is shown in Yanovitzkys (2002) study on media effects on policy attitudes and actions: it suggests tha t the impact of news coverage on the process of policy making is primarily manifested in the timing and intensity of public response to public problems as well as in the nature of the policy solutions pursued. In other words when public opinion is at its most intense, which the policy makers judge based on media coverage of an issue, policy makers are most likely to pursue policy changes based on public opinion. These policy changes due to their nature of being at the whim heightened public awareness and opinion are likely to be responsive rather than preventive measures used to assuage public opinion and appear to be doing something to correct whatever the perceived problem is. Due to the relationships that have been found between the mass media and pub lic opinion, it is necessary to look at topics that are on the medias front burners. Since policy makers respond to the public and the public responds to the media, studying the nature and degree of the media influence on public opinion is crucial (Sorok a 2003). It is also important to look at policy implications that stem from public opinion. Due to the fact that the media holds sway over public opinion, it also holds some sway over public policy since policy is often enacted due to perceived public op inion. Public Opinion and Immigration Policy Public opinion has been shown to have significant impacts on public policy. When the public perceives that there is a problem and their opinion becomes negative, often times there is a response by policy make rs to enact policies that will assuage those public fears and turn public

PAGE 13

13 opinion more favorably towards those in power. This is not always the case and much research has been conducted to determine why. These studies generally look at how much public op inion effects policy, whether this changes with the salience of the topic, and how generalizable the findings are. There has been a large amount of attention paid to communication, especially persuasive messages, and according to Payne (2001) persuasion i s considered the centrally important mechanism for constructing and reconstructing social facts. It would be difficult to find someone who believes that public opinion always shapes public policy, but it would be equally difficult to find someone who beli eves that it never does. Public opinion is likely to effect policies which are especially important to the public, that are relatively simple, and that can be handled by the legislature with straightforward uncomplicated policies. Of course, very few of these issues exist, and many have equally logical arguments from multiple parties, which can make public understanding difficult, though the public may still have a strong opinion. To look at how much public opinion effects policy Burstein (2003) conducte d a review of articles published in major journals and literature reviews. He found that in those articles he reviewed that: Public opinion effects policy three quarters of the times its impact is gauged, its effect is of substantial public policy import ance at least a third of the time, and probably a fair amount more, and issue salience does affect the impact of public opinion on policy (Burstein 2003). Bursteins findings serve as a jumping off point for looking at the effects of public opinion on imm igration policy. Several studies, as well as anecdotal evidence suggest that public opinion towards immigration, especially illegal immigration, have had impacts on immigration policy. In a exploring the effects of public opinion on immigration policy i n Britain, Saggar (2003) states that: Public attitudes constrain the scope of parties and governments. Certainly, policy

PAGE 14

14 proposals to liberalize areas of immigration policy will be highly circumscribed. Public opinion thus acts as something of an over a rching constraint on policy and political discretion. Much of this opinion is based on sensationalized accounts of the numbers of immigrants and asylum seekers in Britain. Though the immigrant population in Britain consists of roughly seven percent of t he total population, a survey found that citizens of Britain believe this number to be between twenty five and thirty percent. This misinformation makes it difficult for politicians to make effective policy to appease the population, which also places pol icy makers in the difficult position of going against public opinion. Thus media influence on public opinion, when it comes to immigration, has placed many policy makers in an untenable situation. On the one hand they need to appease the public and appea r to be effectively handling what the public perceives as a national problem, and on the other hand politicians understand from polls and surveys that the public is misinformed about the number of immigrants as well as their impact on the social resources. In the case of Britain, the immigration issue is even trickier because of the possibility of the European Union taking control of a super national immigration policy that would affect all member countries. Public opinion could force member countries such as Britain to resist EU attempts at harmonizing immigration policies. This possibility looms large as the more negative attitudes the public has towards immigration, the less likely they are to want international actors holding more power than their own government over immigration. The problem arises because the public may believe that if the EU takes over immigration control issues, then they will no longer have a say because their countrys government would no longer hold final say on what type of immi gration policy is enacted.

PAGE 15

15 According to Luedtke (2005) public opinion is pushing against harmonization of immigration policy. He found that there is an effect of the public opinion towards immigrants on public support for harmonization. Those who have m ore negative attitudes towards immigrants are more likely to reject the idea of policy harmonization. This could stem from the fact that those with lower education tend to have less favorable attitudes towards immigrants and also tend to have a more deep rooted national identity, which would make them less likely to support taking the control of immigration away from their countrys government because they are more likely to have more faith in their government than in the governance of the EU. Since atti tudes towards immigrants and immigration have been shown to be tied to whether one prefers EU handling of immigration or the individual nation state, it also stands to reason that their attitudes towards immigration and the EU will have an effect on their opinion about the enlargement of the EU. Devreese and Boomgaarden (2005) found that individuals negative attitudes towards immigrants led to a lower acceptance of European integration. This has interesting implications for the role of media in influenci ng public opinion. With 66 68 percent of the public sharing negative views of immigration, it is likely that the media has aided in portraying immigrants and immigration in a negative light. The effects of public opinion on policy, and in the European c ase on the acceptance of the EU, the media has a wide range of influence. Thus, a content analysis of newspaper articles is an important step to look at how the media portrays illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is one of the most pressing issues in British politics, and has been placed there primarily because of the media sensationalization of the issue, which has turned it into a publicly perceived problem. Turning illegal immigration into a publicly perceived problem has led to policymakers on both sides of

PAGE 16

16 the ideological spectrum to condemn undocumented workers and illegal immigration hoping that rhetoric will be enough to assuage public opinion without being forced into quickly enacting policies have not been fully explored.

PAGE 17

17 CHAPTER 2 METHODS AND THEORETI CAL FRAMEWORK There are several methods used in content analysis research. The method that has been implemented for this project utilizes framing theory. Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) view framing as the central mission of th ose attempting to persuade an audience to embrace the normative idea they support. Framing is the process that news organizations use to define or construct a political issue or controversy. By framing social and political issues in specific ways, news organizations declare the underlying causes and likely consequences of a problem and establish a criterion for evaluating potential remedies for the problem (Segvic 2005). Framing is the way in witch articles and issues are organized and made sense of. T he underlying assumption of frame analysis is that a frame is a necessary property of text. All texts, regardless of how clear or abstruse they may be, are comprised of packages of integrated idea elements held together by some unifying central concept, c alled a frame (Gamson & Lasch, 1983). According to Creed et al. (2002) frame analysis is a technique for approaching a text by attending to its diverse idea elements with the following question: What holds these elements together? The goal of frame anal ysis is understanding how certain idea elements are linked together into packages of meaning, potentially encoded into soundbite like signifiers that stand for those packages of meaning, and deployed in texts and/or other forms of media. According to Pan ( 1993) framing analysis distinguishes itself from other forms of content analysis in two important ways. First, unlike more traditional approaches to content analysis, framing analysis does not conceive of news texts as psychological stimuli with objective meanings. Instead it recognizes texts as containing organized symbolic devices that will interact with the individuals memory for meaning construction. Second, it accepts both the assumption of the rule governed nature of text formation (van Kijk, 1988 ) and the multidimensional

PAGE 18

18 conception of news texts that will allow for cognitive shortcuts in both news production and consumption. Newspapers and other media make certain issues more salient and have the ability to put a certain spin on what is being r eported to lead the reader to see the problem or political issue in a certain light. For example, a newspaper article may state all of the negative aspects of illegal immigration, such as the fact that they are breaking the law by entering without documen tation, but not mention the benefits that they provide, such as the economic benefits to corporations from the cheap labor that illegal workers bring. This allows the media to influence public opinion by framing issues in ways that can be either beneficia l to immigrants or create greater anti immigrant sentiment. Van Gorp (2005) explains this relationship as: the linkage between, on the one hand, the journalistic approach of shaping the news within a frame of reference and according to a latent structur e of meaning and, on the other hand, the stimulation of the public to adopt these frames and to view reality from the same perspective as the journalists do. When the public adopts those frames which the media has presented, the media has exercised its in fluence over public opinion. In forming these frames the media has the ability to not only effect the presence or absence of an idea, but can also emphasize one aspect at the expense of others. According to Dimitrova and Stromback (2005) this is subtly done in order to not alienate their audience: The subtlety of framing is in the way it can construct reality, impact interpretations, and influence the audience responses and opinions toward a particular event after the event enters the public agenda. I n this way framing not only affects the salience of an issue, but also the audiences perceptions. Political ideology can play a major role in the way an issue is framed, especially an issue as politically charged as illegal immigration.

PAGE 19

19 According to Ga mson (1983) for every frame, there is also its opposite. This is important because of the use of the media by various social movements for their causes. This can be seen in looking at different newspapers and is the main reason why this researcher looked at two newspapers that fall on different ends of the ideological spectrum. Anytime there are competing frames from competing news outlets, it is likely that those reading those newspapers already share the ideological views of that particular media outle t. According to Payne (2001) an individual is more likely to accept new claims if they are shown to be similar to already accepted ideas, and this idea of frame resonance potentially explains both the persuasive success of these instruments and their soci al function in the persuasion process. Political and professional ideologies are fundamental to the way that information policy problems and dilemmas are perceived and how problems are screened and represented by different stakeholders (Rowlands, et. al 20 01). Following this reasoning it is likely that there will be different frames employed in the more rightward leaning Daily Telegraph than in the more left leaning Guardian. It is expected that there will be more favorable frames used in the Guardian tha n in the Daily Telegraph, however, this may be constrained by the fact that there is such negative public opinion towards illegal immigration that there will be less of a difference than an issue that was more evenly divided amongst conservatives and liber als. Because public opinion is very negative towards illegal immigration, it is also expected that overall there will be more negative portrayals of illegal immigrants For the purpose of this project there were a total of 212 articles analyzed, 104 from the Daily Telegraph, and 108 from the Guardian. These represent all of the articles concerning illegal immigration in each newspaper from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2006. These articles were collected through online databases from each newspap ers Webpage. The term

PAGE 20

20 illegal immigration was used to search for articles in the database. Each article returned in the search was read to check the validity of the return to ensure that only articles concerning illegal immigration were examined. Thi s is similar to the method used by Dimitrova and Stromback (2005) for article collection in their data analysis about the framing of the Iraq War. The articles were coded based on the framing in which illegal immigration was presented. The specific fram es found in the articles consisted of: ID Cards (Articles discussing the potential use of national ID cards); United States Illegal Immigration (Articles about the ongoing U.S. debate on Illegal Immigration); Tragedy (Articles describing a tragedy that ha ppened to an illegal immigrant or a group of illegal immigrants); and Racism (consists of articles which describe racist attitudes towards illegal immigrants); Law and Order (Articles concerning law and order approaches to Illegal Immigration); Articles about Other Countries (Articles looking at policies, and outcomes concerning illegal immigration in other countries); Exploitation (Articles portraying illegal immigrants as being exploited); Temporary Workers and Amnesty (Articles concerning proposals o n amnesty and temporary workers).

PAGE 21

21 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS A total of ten themes were used to depict illegal immigration and illegal immigrants. Most of these themes had articles framed negatively, positively, and neutrally, however, there were some which had only one frame, and some with two of the three. The themes consisted of articles on ID cards, U.S. Immigration, illegal immigrant tragedies, illegal immigration and race, Law and Order policies, other countries immigration policies (other than the U.S.), exploitation and human trafficking, temporary workers, amnesty, and current immigration policies and proposals. Each of the themes listed will be gone over in detail from both newspapers. These breakdowns will show the differences in ideological approaches to immigration, especially ille gal immigration and different views on what is in Britains best interests. Much of the commentary within these themes follows the ideological reputations of each of the newspapers, with many of the Guardians articles being more liberal and many of The D aily Telegraphs articles being more conservative. ID Cards Both the Guardian and Daily Telegraph were critical of the ID cards that Tony Blair and the Labour party have pushed to curb illegal immigration and terrorism. The Guardian had no articles that p ortrayed ID cards positively, and the Daily Telegraph had only one article framing ID cards in a positive light, which is interesting considering, as will be shown later, the Daily Telegraph was much more likely to take a more anti illegal immigration stan ce in many of their articles, and be more concerned with law and order immigration policies. The Guardian was more likely to take a neutral look at ID cards than a negative one. During the period being studied there were eight neutral articles written on ID cards. Neutral

PAGE 22

22 articles were those which took what one could consider a strict reporting of press releases concerning the use of ID cards and the way the government envisions their use or reporting on what other groups are saying about the ID cards. For example, one of the articles reported: The home secretary, John Reid, yesterday promised to introduce electronic border controls that will count in and out of the country the 90 million people who travel to Britain each year, but admitted the new syste m will not be fully running until 2014. A second article reported the following The identity cards bill published yesterday will give the government the legal powers to set up the scheme and charge the fees it needs to recover the costs of enrolment, iss uing and maintaining the cards and providing verification services. ID cards are to be introduced on a staged basis. First it will become compulsory for foreign nationals to register under the scheme, then it will be voluntary for UK nationals to register when they renew their passports. There were also articles reporting on criticisms of the program as well, but these articles were reporting on the criticisms of others and not criticizing the programs themselves, and these were considered to fall into t he neutral frame as well. The Guardian had five articles portraying ID cards in a negative frame. These articles framed the ID cards negatively using civil liberties as the primary concern. One article went so far as to say: The government claims that national identity cards will help to counter terrorism, illegal immigration and ID fraud. That's rubbish, says Henry Porter, and in fact there is something much more sinister about them they will fundamentally alter the relationship between citizen and state, and make slaves of us all Imagine handing over the keys to your home when you are out at work to allow some faceless bureaucrat to rifle through your desk and drawers, your photograph albums and children's school reports, your bills and love letter s. That is the kind of access they are going to have, and it is going to grow as time goes by and we become accustomed to this unseen presence in our lives. Using civil liberties as a frame against ID cards has a powerful message behind it as most people are fond of their civil liberties and are loath to have any perceived infringements on them.

PAGE 23

23 So framing ID cards as removing civil liberties is a useful tool to shape public opinion against ID cards. Using analogies comparing the use of ID cards to someo ne entering ones home also conjures up very negative connotations, and powerful ones as well considering the value placed on private property in most developed countries. The Daily Telegraph reported the only positive look at ID cards in our sample. In th is article the author attempts to allay fears of state infringement of civil liberties by asserting that the case for ID cards is a case not about liberty but about the modern world. This brings to the mind the old phrase desperate times call for despe rate measures. These desperate times are connected to illegal immigration: A national identity system will have direct benefits in making our borders more secure and countering illegal immigration. I also want to see ID cards made compulsory for all non EU foreign nationals looking for work and when they get a National Insurance number. This will enable us, for the first time, to check accurately those coming into our country, their eligibility to work, for free hospital treatment or to claim benefits. Similarly to the Guardian the Daily Telegraph had articles reporting on the ID cards in a neutral way. There were a total of seven articles which reported on ID cards in a neutral way, and these were more along the lines of straight reporting as opposed t o attempting to evoke the authors opinions and thoughts on the subject. These articles tended to report on what others saw as the pros and cons of ID cards and were generally fairly short in length compared to the commentaries that took on an attempt to portray ID Cards in a positive or negative light. Finally, the Daily Telegraph also had seven articles which framed ID cards in a negative way. The primary thrust of the arguments appeared to be simply that they did not believe that they would work. The re was little talk of civil liberties as in the Guardian, and the costs of the project were of a concern as well. A decision not to proceed with the ID scheme needs to be taken soon, because the start up costs are beginning to soar. It should have been kil led off in Parliament, but Labour MPs, apart from 20 brave souls who rebelled on Second Reading, were either too bovine or too wedded to their party's spooky authoritarianism.

PAGE 24

24 They were also fed, and swallowed, a good deal of guff about the efficacy of an ID system that, over the years, has been hailed as the answer to illegal immigration, terrorism, crime and benefit fraud. One article took a different twist on the cost of the cards and attached it to taxes and the negative images of government waste. At l ong last, the government has given us a clear and comprehensible justification for introducing identity cards: to levy more money from us. As we report today, ID cards will not be a one off cost. We shall be expected to pay to update them whenever we chang e our address or circumstances. And should we neglect to do so, should we, for example, forget to hand in the card of a deceased relative, we shall be subject to gargantuan fines. This was the opening paragraph of one article, which argues the only reas on the government wants to use ID cards is an effort to get more money out of ordinary citizens. It is also important that the author tied this to ordinary citizens rather than people who may purposefully commit fraud; connecting to the potential of any c itizen possibly having large fines for simple mistakes creates a sense of the little people versus the government. Knowing that most citizens will make every effort to comply with the law and hanging the threat of potential failure to comply, through no f ault of their own, implies that the system is set up against them, and thus stokes the us against them flames. United States Illegal Immigration There were a surprising number of articles in both newspapers concerning the illegal immigration debate in th e United States with a total of fifteen from The Guardian and seventeen from the Daily Telegraph. Most of these articles were neutral, and The Guardian had twice as many positive articles about illegal immigrants and illegal immigration in the U.S. than d id the Daily Telegraph. Finally, both newspapers had few negative articles, though it should be noted that the Daily Telegraph had one more negative article four, than positive, three, The Guardian had three times as many positive, six, as negative, two.

PAGE 25

25 The neutral articles in the guardian ranged from those reporting on the protests against a bill passed in the House of Representatives in New York City and Los Angeles to President Bushs struggle within his own Republican party to best deal with the esti mated twelve million illegal immigrants already in the United States. One of the Guardian articles which reported on the protests had this to say: It is being billed as The Great American Boycott 2006. Tomorrow, international labour day in the US, thousan ds or perhaps millions of people are expected to join in a nationwide boycott to protest against proposals that would toughen existing immigration laws. Two of the articles also reported on the split within the Republican Party over illegal immigration an d how best to both seal the boarders and process the large number of illegal immigrants already in the US. With opinion polls charting a steep decline in support from the conservatives who have been the president's bedrock, Mr Bush promised to deploy as many as 6,000 national guard troops along the 2,000 mile frontier as part of a $1.9bn (.01bn) programme to seal off America's border. He also plans to increase the border patrol force. These neutral articles offered detailed accounts of the current debate and political climate surrounding illegal immigration and illegal immigrants in the U.S. While the neutral reporting in The Guardian focused on the debate in the US as well as the protests, the neutral articles in the Daily Telegraph focused on cons ervatives being unhappy with President Bushs immigration policy, the deployment of U.S. military to the boarder with Mexico, and finally with the civilian groups taking matters into their own hands. While these articles were neutral in their reporting, t he articles focused on conservative themes, such as sealing off the boarders. President George W Bush last night sent thousands of troops to the Mexican US frontier in an eye catching gesture to tighten border security and raise the morale of his mutinou s conservative supporters.

PAGE 26

26 While reporting on them in a neutral way, the articles on civilian groups, such as the Minute Men were, conservative in subject matter, for example: The Minuteman Project is the brainchild of Chris Simcox, the editor of Tombston e Tumbleweed the newspaper in the town best known for the Gunfight at the OK Corral. "Our aim is to send a message to Mr. Bush and Congress that they have not listened to the demands of citizens," he said as he deployed teams every few hundred yards alon g five miles of border. "We are modeling what homeland security should look like. There should be National Guardsmen every 2,000 yards from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. You can't find a greater threat to the US than right here." While these articles were reported on in a neutral manner, the subject reported on were on the conservative side of the immigration debates, as many of The Guardian articles were written neutrally about liberal themes such as protests supportive of illegal immigrants. The po sitive looks of illegal immigration in the United States, from the Guardian, focused on the value of productive labor that the immigrants bring, as well as positive looks at the protests supportive of illegal immigrants. One of the articles posed the ques tion of whether or not the Hispanic community, which the author argues has historically attempted to make itself invisible due to the high number of illegal immigrants, is finally over its terror. They argue that the protests are a sign that even the il legal immigrants are tired of hiding in the shadows and being exploited: Yet that is precisely what the west has been doing demonizing migrant labourers politically and targeting them legally, even as it depends on them economically. This has made anti i mmigration legislation difficult to challenge. Not because migrants are hard to reach businesses find them easily but because they are difficult to organize as their fates are vulnerable to the whims of their employers and of the state. The result was a community that, until recently, was hidden in plain sight. A community that had essentially been trying to remain invisible suddenly concluded that their invisibility was only making them more vulnerable. This exploitation of migrant labor, especially of illegal workers, was a common theme in the portrayals in the Guardian. The argument being that historically the United States has allowed

PAGE 27

27 illegal immigrants into the country to do work that its citizens would not do, at least not for the wages being of fered, and exploiting the workers by paying very low wages due to the threat of being deported. Migrant labourers are crucial to the US economy. Yet xenophobia among a militant minority of the public allied with opportunism among a majority of the politici ans has conspired to demonize them. The Minutemen, a vigilante group that started out hunting down illegal immigrants on the border, now targets day labourers. In December, the House of Representatives passed one of the most draconian anti immigration bill s for a generation. Each of the positive articles in the Daily Telegraph were about the protests supportive of illegal immigrants. They did not focus on the exploitation of immigrants and the protestors attempt to organize to be recognized, but instead were about the power of immigrants in general. This power seems, to come solely from the large numbers of protestors, as this is what the articles focused on, for example: The metropolitan melting pot is home to millions of both legal and illegal immigr ants and, although estimates varied wildly, at least 500,000 demonstrators were thought to have taken part in some form of action on Monday. The articles focused on the political implications of these large numbers of protestors and who would come out on top between the two major political parties in the U.S. The protests were portrayed in a positive light, but they did portray the illegal immigrants themselves in a positive light, they barely mentioned them at all. One of the two negative articles in the Guardian was not negative towards illegal immigrants or immigration, but instead negative towards policies in the U.S. and towards what the author considered vigilantes patrolling the U.S. boarder. The article was written in a negative tone towards immig ration policy in the U.S. however, thus it was considered to have a negative frame. The article argued that individuals who were patrolling the boarder on their own would create problems for the real immigration officers:

PAGE 28

28 Hundreds of anti immigrant acti vists were gathering in Tombstone, Arizona, yesterday to begin a month long unofficial patrol of the border with Mexico. To greet them, hundreds of immigrants' rights activists planned to travel to the desert of Arizona from across the southern US. And cau ght in the middle, are the thousands of undocumented immigrants who try to cross the border from Mexico each day, and the hundreds of US government border patrol agents who try to stop them. The second article was negative towards illegal immigrants in t he U.S. The author went so far as to say that everyone thinks they have the right to live in the United States. The also mentions what she perceives to be a double standard in that the people who expect to be able to enter the U.S. are from countries w ith strict immigration policies and boarder control policies, of their own. The negative articles in The Daily Telegraph looked primarily at the political expediency of President Bush wanting to grant amnesty to the existing illegal immigrant population in the US, and of the breaking of the law by people entering into the U.S. illegally. According to one article, the corporations who backed President Bush in his reelection gain too much from illegal immigration for the president, or congress for that mat ter, to do anything to truly seal the boarders: Immigration across the Rio Grande is too useful to America and, through remittances, too lucrative for Mexico for either side to summon the necessary determination to seal an immensely long, and often harsh border. Mr. Bush's tinkering should not blind us to the fact that the benefits of the present situation outweigh the disadvantages. Thus these articles argue that the correct policy would to be to seal the boarders, but politicians lack the political will to do this. The second type of negative articles were those that portrayed those entering into the United States illegally as criminals who deserve to be prosecuted. This ties in with the first type in the sense that there should be more boarder con trol but these focus on the criminality of illegal immigration rather than on how best to solve the problem. These articles use the

PAGE 29

29 stealing of jobs from native workers as problematic and argue that boarder enforcement is the only way to deal with il legal immigrants. Tragedy Stories There were articles in both newspapers which depicted tragedies involving illegal immigrants. Most of these tragedies involved large groups of illegal immigrants, either attempting to enter a country (some of the articles involved tragedies in other countries) and articles about illegal immigrants being the victim of tragedy when already within their destination country. It is important to note that none of the articles in either of the papers portrayed the victims in a n egative light, and generally showed a sympathetic view of the victims. There were a total of eight articles concerning illegal immigrant tragedies. These articles would all be classified as positive in the sense that they portray the victims in a sympathe tic way. These include articles concerning a tragedy involving Africans from Zimbabwe who were attempting to enter into South Africa: Dite residents told officials they saw the large group try to cross the river, which is currently a raging torrent becau se of heavy rains. The group held hands to form a human chain, but the surging current swept them away, according to witnesses. Zimbabwe's state newspaper, the Herald, said the number of dead could be as high as 60. Thousands of desperate Zimbabweans cros s the border to South Africa each week, fleeing food shortages, unemployment and state repression, according to human rights groups. There were two articles concerning this tragedy as well as two concerning an ongoing trial involving a gangmaster who is accused of allowing twenty one Chinese illegal immigrants to die: Gangmaster Lin Liang Ren, 29, from Liverpool, is accused of 21 counts of manslaughter which he denies. He is also charged with perverting the course of justice with his girlfriend, Zhao X iao Qing, and of conspiracy to facilitate illegal immigration. An hour later, the jurors were taken out to watch the tide coming in and covering the sand. They remained on the hovercraft and were shown the Kent and Keer channels and

PAGE 30

30 how the water quickly filled them up and covered the cockle beds. These articles not only viewed the victims sympathetically, but also showed the gangmaster as someone who exploits illegal immigrants and that this exploitation is what led to their deaths. This could also b e seen as being positive of illegal immigrants in the sense that they are definitely negative to those who would seek to in some way exploit them. The Daily Telegraph had articles concerning tragedies involving illegal immigrants as well, though there are fewer of them, six in all. Nearly all of the articles, five in all, were of the story concerning the Chinese immigrants who died at the hands, or due to the neglect, of the gangmaster. These articles were similarly negative towards the gangmaster and predominantly followed the murder trial of the gangmaster. These articles while sympathetic of the victims were much more likely to be about the trial than the victims themselves: Some managed to swim to safety or were rescued but at least 21 were drowne d," Tim Holroyde, QC, prosecuting, told the jury at Preston Crown Court. "It is the prosecution case that their deaths were caused by the criminal negligence of Lin Liang Ren. He was responsible for them and he completely failed to take proper care for the ir safety as they worked in the cold and dark." On the second day of Lin's trial at Preston Crown Court, Timothy Holroyde, QC, prosecuting, summed up the cocklers' predicament as "truly dreadful. He said: "They were far from home and unable to speak suff icient English to summon help, in the cold and dark, with no obvious route back to shore even if they could swim and with the water rising swiftly and inexorably.'' The tragedy might have been even worse. "Seventy Chinese workers had been due to travel to the bay from Liverpool that night but they had insufficient transport," Mr. Holroyde said. Only Lin's workers made the trip. The other article concerning an illegal immigrant tragedy was one that did not appear in The Guardian concerning illegal immigran ts attempting to enter Spain. These individuals apparently have tried to enter through other countries in more hospitable areas, but have been caught by Algerian or Moroccan authorities and dropped them off on a 140 mile stretch of desert:

PAGE 31

31 They were almos t all young men in their twenties from countries as varied as Mali, Cameroon, Congo, Gambia, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Senegal. Despite their different origins, they had one experience in common: they had all been rounded up by Morocc an police and abandoned in the desert. Exhausted, some sick and all suffering from hunger, they also had one common goal: to reach Oujda without being caught by the police. There they can continue their journey to Europe and join the ranks of what Spain regards as an invading army of illegal migrants, or beat a retreat and head home via Algeria. All feared that, if caught before Oujda, they would be returned to the desert where dozens of their fellow travelers are believed to have perished. All were surv ivors of a mass expulsion of immigrants heading towards Europe that Moroccan security forces began a week ago. Racism There were thirteen articles concerning racism in the Guardian and all of them took an anti racist view, and many of them associated the p olitics of the Tory Party as well as the British National Party (BNP). Most of the articles were concerned with the potential immigration policies if the Tory Party were to return to power and the use of fear of other races as part of their campaigning st rategy. In contrast there was only one article in The Daily Telegraph concerning racism, and its main concern was that there was a fear of the police to be accused of being racist and thus preventing them from profiling based on race. Seven of the thirtee n articles concerning race in The Guardian contained references to negative tactics by the Tories and BNP towards immigration policies and associated their views of immigration as having racial undertones. "Asylum and immigration" are the public words that tell of unspoken passions on race, Britishness, Islam and other things winked and nudged at in "Are you think what we're thinking?" Many Australians watching the current campaign in the UK are wondering how low Crosby will go. For a start, he's employing the same script as in the Australian election of 2001. He suggested that Australia was being "invaded" by illegal refugees and asylum seekers who were said to have direct links with terrorism. The far right British National party is claiming that Africans are being paid up to ,000 to move into its number one target seat to protect the majority of a government minister. The party has poured activists from the south of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland into Barking, the east London seat that the ch ildren's minister, Margaret Hodge, holds with a 9,500 majority. Voters are being canvassed by 50 to 60 strong teams of BNP activists and targeted with a series of inflammatory leaflets.

PAGE 32

32 These articles present a picture of conservative politics in Brit ain using race and connecting race and ethnicity to being British in an effort to gain and advantage in their elections. This extreme form of nationalism and its effective use implies that there are people who this tactic will work on. This is not like ly the target audience of The Guardian and thus it is interesting to show how they use this connection being made by the more conservative parties between race and immigration to look at the opposition parties negatively. There was also an interesting arti cle looking at the fact that the Tory partys choice for Prime Minister. Michael Howard was the son of an immigrant himself. They question why this is not brought up considering the partys rhetoric against the then current immigration policies and a desi re to make immigration more difficult. The article also accuses Howard of using race as a way to galvanize people around making immigration more difficult, especially for asylum seekers who often arrive from African and Middle Eastern countries. The res t of the articles were centered around the need for illegal immigrants as part of maintaining a certain standard of living, and that most attempts to prevent immigration or illegal immigrants were due to racist and/or nationalistic ideologies: Have you eve r thought about what Britain would look like if the effects of postwar migration were suddenly reversed? Tellingly, most of parliament, our corporate boardrooms and newspaper editorial meetings would look much the same. But quite how these people would get to work, as public transport in most major cities stalled and minicabs became scarce is another matter. Economically, without the huge pool of cheap labour emanating from the developing world, documented or not, we simply could not function as we do at p resent. Politically, if Britain's last election campaign is anything to go by, without scapegoating and marginalizing that same pool of labour it appears our political culture would be unable to function. So we are left despising the very people on whom we depend, and immigrants are left with the worst of all worlds economically exploited and socially demonized. Vulnerable to unscrupulous employers, opportunistic politicians and racist hatemongers, they work simply to exist in a place where their very e xistence has become an affront.

PAGE 33

33 These articles focused primarily on the exploitation of illegal immigrants not only in their labor but as using them as political pawns in power struggle between the Labour and Tory parties. This double bind leaves illeg al immigrants and even guest workers in the predicament of being fearful of not only being exploited but of being ignored by the only people with the ability to help them, namely the British government. The lone article overtly talking about race in the D aily Telegraph was concerning the authors belief in the need for ethnic/racial profiling. The author believed that the police were fearful of being called racist and thus were not doing their job effectively when dealing with minorities: The fight agai nst terrorism is being hampered because a growing number of police officers are reluctant to stop and search suspects of foreign appearance, a Police Federation leader said yesterdayofficers were often reluctant to challenge foreign looking people for fea r of attracting racism complaints which might threaten their career. In the authors view the reluctance of police to appear racist has hampered the ability of Britain to protect itself from a number of problems, illegal immigration, terrorism, and crime i n general. Law and Order Issues concerning law and order immigration policies comprised, by far, the largest single theme for both newspapers with a total of thirty articles concerning law and order in The Guardian and forty eight in The Daily Telegraph. It is important to note that there was not a single negative article concerning law and order approaches in the Daily Telegraph while there were eleven in The Guardian. There were only five positive articles about law and order tactics and policies in Th e Guardian, whereas there were forty positive articles in The Daily Telegraph. Finally, there were fourteen neutral articles in The Guardian and Eight in The Daily Telegraph. The negative articles in The Guardian primarily revolved around incidents in det ention centers that the authors felt were a direct result of law and order policies, and negative views of

PAGE 34

34 using law and order policies for controlling boarders. There were a series of problems exposed in detention centers where those who were denied am nesty or otherwise caught in Britain illegally were sent pending deportation. There were several articles about the detention center Harmondsworth where poor conditions led to a riot by those in detention. The prison inspection team says it had serious concerns over the way Harmondsworth was run by United Kingdom Detention Service, with 44% of detainees reporting they had been victimized by staff and 60% saying they felt unsafe in the centre. More than 2,000 failed asylum seekers and illegal migrants pa ss through Harmondsworth each year and those interviewed by the prison inspectors described the custody officers as "aggressive", "intimidating", "rude" and "unhelpful", especially towards those who could not speak English. These articles were highly crit ical of the conditions faced by those detained at Harmondsworth and there were similar articles concerning the use of gangmasters which are licensed by the state. These gangmasters are sanctioned to work with immigrants in areas such as agriculture an d fishing where immigrants are typically housed on site. While the Gangmasters Licensing Act (due to come into force next month) was debated in the aftermath of the Morecambe Bay tragedy and a crackdown was carried out against illegal Chinese immigration, gang labour exploitation continued. Now Polish workers are working under similar conditions to the Chinese. Led by Polish gangmasters, the workers, with no experience at sea, confide that the worst thing about the work is the lack of safety. Nothing has ch anged. These articles were also very negative towards the fishing industry which employed and profited from the use of migrant workers and gangmasters. There were also articles concerning policy and debate which The Guardian viewed negatively. The main argument concerned the general elections where authors from The Guardian felt that the Labour party was being drawn rightward by the more conservative Tory party as well as the NBP. The very fact that the Labour government is about to announce a package of detailed immigration policies will be enough to put the wind up some of its supporters. Nothing that Charles Clarke can say today will dispel some of these critics' suspicions

PAGE 35

35 that, merely by addressing the immigration question at all, the government i s pandering to a rightwing agenda set by the tabloid press and worse. The fact that the tempo is so obviously being set by a Conservative party that seems unable to get electoral traction any other way only strengthens these concerns. The idea that the debate on immigration was being dragged to the right was a common theme even in The Guardian articles concerning race. The neutral law and order articles concerned mainly reporting of stories with law and order themes without giving them a positive or nega tive spin. These were articles where the author was reporting rather than attempting to change opinion. Many of these had to do with announcements from the government or the political parties concerning policies and potential policies concerning immigr ation, such as a report by the government that there would be an addition 400 officers assigned to locate illegal immigrants. While this may be a law and order approach to dealing with illegal immigrants it was not portrayed positively or negatively by th e author. Another interesting article described a new way the government was considering deporting illegal immigrants or those denied asylum: Britain is to take part in a plan to organize joint charter flights to deport illegal immigrants across Europe, t he home secretary, Charles Clarke, confirmed yesterday. Interior ministers from France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK, agreed to organize charter flights that will pick up illegal migrants in each country before flying them home. The scheme will effec tively set up a discrete charter airline, already dubbed "migrant air", that will cut the cost of deportations and reduce the need to send those being deported back home on commercial airlines. Though they were fewer, neutral articles from The Daily Teleg raph were similar in that they mainly concerned policy announcements from the various political parties during the election and various statements made by the government concerning reports on the number of illegal immigrants and government reports concerni ng illegal immigration or immigration in general. Almost half of the articles reported on a new law that would allow businesses to be fined for employing illegal immigrants, for example:

PAGE 36

36 According to The Sunday Telegraph, John Reid, the Home Secretary, is considering tougher sanctions on directors whose companies give work to the estimated 570,000 foreigners illegally in Britain. A new Immigration and Asylum Bill, the fourth since 1997, aims to make it easier to penalize firms, gangmasters and employm ent agencies which knowingly employ large numbers of illegal immigrants. They face a criminal prosecution resulting in a two year prison sentence. There were five articles in The Guardian which were considered pro law and order. These articles generally argued that there needed to be more done in order to prevent illegal immigrants from entering, and that due to current policies it is easier in Britain to gain entry and stay illegally than in most Western countries. These articles while not critical of i llegal immigrants were critical of policies that did little to prevent people from overstaying visas and of the policy that enables people from more countries to enter without a visa: The UK has the most generous visa arrangements of any western developed country, a situation that could aid illegal immigration, the conference heard. Britain demands visas for visitors from 104 countries, compared with 132 for most other European countries, 158 for the US and 161 for Australia. "The UK knows perfectly well i t will bring more illegal immigrants, but it wants to cling to its relationships with its former colonies," he said. Passport holders from rich nations faced the fewest restrictions. Dr Neumayer said the study showed that rich countries systematically use visa restrictions to keep out visitors from countries that are poor, undemocratic and experience violent conflict. At the same time, citizens from those richer countries are enjoying much better access to poorer countries. These articles talk much less about what is traditionally thought of as border security such as an increase in the number of officers dedicated to removing illegal immigrants, these were mainly concerned with how illegal immigrants enter the country rather than how to remove them or any negative implications of having a large population of illegal immigrants. The Daily Telegraph on the other hand viewed law and order very positively and authors openly supported the more conservative policies of the Tories and often heavily criticized the Labour party for being lax on immigration, particularly illegal immigration. One of the more

PAGE 37

37 interesting frames was that while the Guardian viewed the debate moving rightward, The Daily Telegraph viewed it as coming together. In many ways, the poli cies of the two major parties are coming together. After presiding over record levels of immigration, the Government intends to introduce a points based system next year that will seek to attract only those who make a positive contribution to the economy w hile effectively shutting the door to low skilled workers from outside the EU. Whereas The Guardian saw this change in the Labour party moving to more restrictive policies as a negative, one author in The Daily Telegraph saw the move by the Tories of drop ping the idea for making the reunification of families more difficult, as a positive step towards compromise. There was also a great deal of ridicule by authors in The Daily Telegraph that the British government does not know how many illegal immigrants ar e in Britain. One of the Home Office employees made a statement that he was unsure how many illegal immigrants were in Britain, and the Daily Telegraph ridiculed the office and the Labour party for being clueless on illegal immigration, and finally all but accused the Home Office of lying during the election after the government finally did release estimates concerning the number of illegal immigrants in Britain: The number of illegal immigrants living in Britain could be as high as 570,000 or as low as 310,000, the government said yesterday when it published the first official figures on the subject. The Home Office report follows Tony Blair's insistence during the election campaign that it was impossible to provide an estimate. Interviewed on Newsnigh t during the campaign he refused to give a precise figure, despite being pressed 18 times by Jeremy Paxman to do so. The majority of articles were critical of the Labour party and Tony Blair over immigration policy and not deporting illegal immigrations i n a timely manner. They argued that illegal immigrants were lost track of and that the government outright ignored tips concerning illegal immigrants:

PAGE 38

38 The Home Office was accused last night of ignoring tip offs about illegal migrants working in the black economy. Employment agencies said they had told the Immigration Service of people with false papers but it took no action. Several articles seemed to revel at what their authors perceived as incompetence on the part of the Home Office: In most weeks, the news that the Home Office had accidentally repealed an extremely important law would have caused quite a stir. Yesterday, however, the fact that it may now be perfectly legal to carry a forged passport, because of yet another blunder by this most chaotic department of state, made only a short item on page six of my edition of The Daily Telegraph. We have all become so used to tales of monstrous incompetence dangerous criminals lost without trace, no attempts made to trace illegal immigrants or to enforc e deportation orders that we greet each new instance of bungling with a weary shrug: "Oh, well, it's New Labour's Home Office. What do you expect?" While most of the articles were highly critical of Labour, there were a couple of articles that supported the efforts of Tony Blair, which seems to indicate that he had capitulated to the conservative movement towards greater isolationism, at least in isolating Britain from the poorer and more unskilled immigrants of the world. Other Countries Immigration Pol icies There were many articles in both newspapers which looked at immigration policies in other countries in either negative or neutral ways, none of the articles reflected positive frames of immigration policies in other countries. Both newspapers had an equal number of both negative and neutral articles with six neutral articles and six negative articles in The Guardian and five neutral and six negative articles in The Daily Telegraph. There were differences between the two newspapers on why they portra yed various policies negatively, and on the type of neutral articles they published. The Guardians negative articles usually looked at the law and order type approaches to immigration policies. Most of the articles looked at a plan to deport large number s of illegal immigrants or to increase boarder security instead of offering increased immigration as a way of

PAGE 39

39 combating illegal immigration. The authors seemed to take the view that the best way to prevent illegal immigration is to expand existing immigra tion so that those entering the country would no longer be considered illegal. For example, they were highly critical of a French raid on an abandoned building known for housing both illegal and legal African immigrants: Up to 1,000 squatters, including 2 00 children, many from Ivory Coast, Mali and Senegal, were crammed into 300 small student rooms with improvised wiring, poor sanitation and damp. But only half were asylum seekers or illegal immigrants. The rest had legal status to remain in France but, su pport groups said, they could not find housing because of racism and discrimination. As shown in this article, the authors imply race as a motivating factor, and they do this in other articles looking at policies or crackdowns in other countries. For exa mple, one article looked at Spains guest worker program and argued that while Spain was increasing their guest worker program they were offering the visas to non African countries, which is where the majority of their illegal immigration originates from. Spain is to hire 180,000 immigrants in their countries of origin next year in an effort to stem illegal immigration while satisfying its demand for cheap labour. But just 75 people will be recruited from Senegal, from where thousands of migrants set sail t his year in packed wooden fishing boats for the Canary Islands many drowning in the attempt But he said it was hard to make a case for recruiting in sub Saharan Africa. "It's much further, integration is more difficult and businesses want the easiest so lution," he said. Of the six negative articles in The Daily Telegraph there were actually two which frowned upon the law and order approach to dealing with illegal immigrants by other countries. One of these was a look at the idea percolating in Australi a concerning using armed prison type ships to detain and hold illegal fishermen also referred to as boat people. The article refers to the use of boats to send the original settlers of Australia, criminals from Britain and argues that Australia is looking to its convict origins.

PAGE 40

40 There were also negative articles concerning a lack of law and order policies in other countries. They were particularly harsh concerning Spain, arguing that they would be releasing 1,500 illegal immigrants into Europe: But, under its liberal immigration laws, illegal migrants can be held for a maximum of 40 days. If officials then fail to establish their nationality, or discover that they come from a country such as Mali which has no repatriation agreement with Spain, they must be released. Most illegal arrivals will therefore have to be set free, officials said. Once released on the Spanish mainland, the migrants can make their way through continental Europe because of the border free Schengen zone. Unlike The Guar dian, The Daily Telegraph published articles critical of Frances immigration policies, not because they were too harsh, but because they were too lenient, and they portrayed the squatters that were evicted, which was mention in one of The Guardian articles as being a blight on the French government. They were a blight, not because of how the government treated them, but because there were so many illegal immigrants involved that the author believed should not have been there to begin with. The six neutral articles in The Guardian and five neutral articles in The Daily Telegraph were similar in their reporting. The neutral articles of both newspapers, focused mainly on France and Spain. They focused on the upcoming elections in France and the center right candidate who wants stronger boarder controls throughout Europe, and the more liberal Spanish government which granted amnesty to over 700,000 illegal immigrants. One of the articles in The Guardian reported on a speech given by Nikolas Sarkozy the cente r right candidate in France criticizing the amnesty by Spains government: France and Spain have become embroiled in a row over immigration after the French interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, criticized the Spanish government for an immigration amnesty th at saw 580,000 foreigners receive work and residency papers last year. Mr. Sarkozy, who is expected to fight for France's presidency on a centre right ticket next year, said the socialist government of the Spanish Prime Minister, Jos Luis Rodrguez Zapat ero, had been encouraging illegal immigrants to breach Europe's frontiers.

PAGE 41

41 While The Daily Telegraph did not report on the back and forth between France and Spain concerning Spains amnesty, they did report on policies put forth by Sarkozky concerning ille gal immigrants in France: Nicolas Sarkozy, France's interior minister and presidential hopeful has unveiled tougher rules on immigration, making it easier to expel foreign workers or those refusing to integrate. Immigrants applying for lengthy stays wou ld have to respect a list of obligations as part of a new "contract of welcome and integration". These include learning French and actively looking for a job. It is interesting to note that the neutral articles of The Guardian focused mainly on amnesty i n Spain, a human interest story in France and the spat between the two countries, The Daily Telegraphs articles focused mainly on the law and order policies of France and the amnesty in Spain. Exploitation of Illegal Immigrants Exploitation of illegal imm igrants was much more prevalent in The Guardian, twelve articles, than in The Daily Telegraph which had only two articles. These articles concerned the exploitation of workers ranging from working in the agricultural sectors to the sex trade in Britain. These articles placed illegal immigrants in a sympathetic light, which is likely why there were so many more articles in The Guardian than The Daily Telegraph. Three of the articles in The Guardian looked at the sex trade and the exploitation of women by human trafficking in Britain. These articles were pressing for the government to take a more law and order approach to the problem, though this is difficult because many of the women enter the country legally, lured by individuals claiming to be hiring o fficials and getting the women work papers. Once in country however, they find that their lives and bodies are no longer their own: In a disturbing picture of the violence suffered by the women, some of whom are as young as 15, officers have accounts of t hem being raped, threatened, stripped of

PAGE 42

42 passports and forced into underground brothels on arrival in the UK. Many have been tempted to the UK by promises of a lucrative summer job; others have come after trafficking gangs posing as employment agencies ins isted their parents sign consent forms to permit them to travel. These articles show these women sympathetically and recognize the difficulty of ending the problem since many do enter legally. While there were three articles concerning the sex trade, ther e were nine articles concerning the exploitation of workers. These mainly focused on big businesses knowingly employing illegal immigrants primarily for cheep labor. The main problem being that illegal immigrants do not have any protection under the law since they are in the country illegally. They have the choice to be exploited by businesses or to face deportation. They cannot go to the government for assistance, and big businesses, especially in agriculture, fishing and construction rely on this fear of deportation as a way to control their workers: The companies most likely to employ illegal migrants are also the ones most likely to fiddle their tax and national insurance, drive people round the countryside in dangerous vehicles, ignore employment r ights and undercut the minimum wage. Although illegal workers are the most vulnerable, few of these employers only employ illegals. Their exploitation is shared by legal migrants and the most vulnerable people from the British workforce. Many of the artic les pushed for equal rights for all workers regardless of their immigration status. The argument being that no matter what ones visa status workers should all have equal rights. These articles also point to the violence both physical and psychological th at both illegal and legal immigrants must deal with because of their precarious positions in low skill jobs which the individual is generally easily replaced: Supermarkets, catering chains and processing plants are accused of allowing a system dependent on subcontracted labour to continue which permits not only abuse and underpayment of foreign workers, but also identity fraud, large scale tax avoidance, crime and violence. Most important of all, several months of in depth interviews with illegal migrant wo rkers show how vulnerable they are to exploitation, intimidation and abuse.

PAGE 43

43 The two articles in The Daily Telegraph also portrayed exploitation of illegal immigrants negatively and the victims sympathetically. One of the articles focused on child slaver y, and the other was a story of a pastor who paid slave wages to illegal immigrant builders. While the story on child slavery portrayed the victims, in a sympathetic light, the other story focused more on the pastor and the illegality of his actions rat her than looking at the workers in a more sympathetic way, an example from the article concerning the pastor: The leader of a newly formed evangelist church was preparing to face his congregation last night to explain why he illegally shipped a group of A frican workers into Britain so that they could help build his house on "slave wages The story on child slavery portrayed the children positively and their smugglers as ruthless and described how parents often paid the smugglers taking their children b ecause they believed they were going to live a better life. The victims are smuggled into Britain or brought in on false passports by adults posing as relatives. They are put to work immediately, live in appalling conditions and are subjected to physical a nd sexual abuse. The article also places blame on the government for not doing enough to tackle the problem, and for the lax enforcement of border security as well as for punishing the children by deporting them, oftentimes leading to them being smuggled into the country once again. Temporary Workers and Amnesty This category concerning temporary workers and amnesty was the theme with the fewest number of articles. There were three positive, and two neutral in The Guardian, and one positive one neutral, a nd two negative in The Daily Telegraph for a total of nine articles. This was also the most specific theme, while others, such as the articles concerning exploitation varied on the topics covered within the theme, these were very specific. It is also imp ortant to note that there

PAGE 44

44 were no negative articles concerning guest workers or amnesty in The Guardian, while there were two negative articles in The Daily Telegraph. The positive articles in The Guardian included one looking at temporary workers and two looking at potential amnesty for illegal immigrants. The article about temporary workers focused mainly on immigrants from Poland looking for work and because of Polands entrance into the EU potential workers can now enter freely. However, because they are not British citizens, they do not qualify for any benefits, even homeless shelters turn them away because of their status: But recent Polish immigration has also caused a range of problems, perhaps mostly poignantly for Poles themselves. "We help a lo t of Poles who sleep rough in London when they first arrive," says Jan Moktzycki, president of the Federation of Poles in Great Britain. "If a newly arrived Pole tries to check into a homelessness shelter they will be told that they cannot stay because the y are not allowed to receive benefits, which includes staying in a shelter. I think that is inhumane." These workers are referred to as temporary workers because they are expected to return to Poland in a relatively short period of time because of the lac k of government support. The theory goes that if people are not helped by the government, then they will not be able to maintain manageable standard of living and send money back to family members, and thus they will likely return. Of course this is a ra ther cynical view and one could also argue that they are simply attempting to save enough money to provide a higher standard of living in their home country. The articles concerning amnesty focused on immigrants creating a new life in Britain. They would no longer have to work in the shadows and be exploited by employers who take advantage of their illegal status through low wages and poor working conditions. The concern is also about the contribution that illegal immigrants make to the economy. They pro vide labor for wages far below what national citizens would earn.

PAGE 45

45 Any new system will not work if no action is taken to address the issue of people already working in Britain undocumented or in breach of immigration conditions. The sheer numbers involved m ake it obvious that any proposal to deport them all is simply impractical. Some badly paid sectors of the economy would be facing labour shortages if this were to be attempted. The lone positive article in The Daily Telegraph was concerning temporary worke rs. This article notes that while borders may be open for travel, countries have no obligations to allow people entering the country to work within those borders. However, the article talks about Britain being one of only three countries in the EU to ope n its workplace up to Easter European countries like Poland. All other countries place barriers to work or strict quotas on the number of workers from Easter European countries, however as the reporter notes those barriers must come down by 2010 and Brit ain likely has a distinct advantage when this happens because: By opening their borders from the start, it seems reasonable to assume that Britain, Ireland and Sweden have landed the cream of the new member states' crop the workers with the most get up and go, the best English language skills, and those who want to make an honest go of their new lives. Both of the neutral articles in The Guardian looked at temporary workers, These articles mainly gave demographics concerning which of the new EU countr ies these workers were coming from, the types of jobs they were entering into and totals for the number of new immigrant workers. For example this Guardian article states that: The latest figures also show that by June this year, a total of 447,000 easter n Europeans had registered to work in Britain since May 2004 when Poland and seven other mainly former communist states joined the European Union. Most have come from Poland 264,000 and more than 82% are young, aged 18 to 34, with no dependents. The n eutral article in The Daily Telegraph looked at amnesty for illegal immigrants. This article gave estimates as to how many illegal immigrants would be given, and the reasons that those who are backing amnesty are giving for granting amnesty. The author n otes a report from the

PAGE 46

46 government stating how much extra revenue would be generated through taxes paid by newly legalized workers, as well as the cost of deporting illegal immigrants: Britain's 500,000 illegal immigrants should be granted an "amnesty" and allowed to apply for work permits in a move that would net around billion a year for the Treasury in extra taxes The bill for deporting each immigrant, based on the cost of enforced removal of asylum seekers, would be ,000 per individual, meaning a total bill of .7 billion. The sole negative article was in The Daily Telegraph and dealt with amnesty as well. This article looks at the perceived consequences of amnesty. For example the author argues there would be anger from other EU countries beca use once the illegal immigrants were made citizens they could freely enter other EU countries. The article uses this quote that sums up one of the authors main arguments against amnesty: "It will not solve the problem; it will make it worse. It is an acti ve incentive for people to come here illegally.'' David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "With our borders so badly protected, even speculating about an amnesty is highly irresponsible. An amnesty could lead to a massive, uncontrolled increase in th e numbers coming here."

PAGE 47

47 CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSIONS AND DISC USSION The primary expectation from the beginning of this project was that since public opinion towards illegal immigrants in Britain was predominantly negative, then the articles printed in popular newspapers would be negativ e as well. Since it was shown that public opinion is affected by newspaper articles, especially for salient issues that the public is already aware of, such as illegal immigration, it was expected that the number of negatively framed articles would outnum ber the number of articles that were framed in a more understanding light. The term understanding is used as apposed to using the word positive to describe the articles that were not framed negatively because those articles though not framed negatively, did not attribute positive aspects to illegal immigration. The articles portrayed a more humanistic or understanding framing of illegal immigrants and the exploitation and tragedy that they face. The best light that illegal immigrants were portrayed in was as victims, either of exploitation or tragedy, but very rarely even in those circumstances were they ever truly positively portrayed. While there were less negatively framed articles than anticipated, the differences between the newspapers were more in line with expectations. The Guardian in particular was in line with expectations, with negatively framed articles representing only 17 percent of the total sampled, and positively framed articles represented 49 percent of the total, with the remaining 34 percent being neutral. It was not surprising to find that there were nearly three times as many positively framed articles than negatively framed articles in The Guardian since the Guardian is considered a more politically left leaning newspaper The fi ndings for the Daily Telegraph were also in line with expectations, with 58 percent of all articles being framed negatively, and only 12.5 percent of the articles were framed in a more positive, or understanding way. The remaining 29.5 percent were consid ered neutral. This

PAGE 48

48 is a larger difference than that found in The Guardian with almost five times more negative articles than positive. One explanation for this higher proportion is that The Daily Telegraph staff views illegal immigration as more of a pro blem that The Guardian views it as a situation to be sympathized with. Another explanation would be that The Daily Telegraph is simply a more political newspaper than The Guardian, or that The Guardian is more subtle in their reporting, thus using less o pinion and more statistical information and quotations of government officials to make articles appear more neutral. The fact that there was an election in 2005 likely played a role in the number of articles in each of the newspapers, as well as why there were more neutral articles in The Guardian than in The Daily Telegraph. If The Daily Telegraph is a more political newspaper than The Guardian, then it is understandable that there would be fewer neutral articles and a larger difference between the numbe r of articles sympathetic to illegal immigration and those that portrayed it in a more negative light. Though this is somewhat contradicted by the fact that immigration, illegal or otherwise, is a very hot button issue and there were more articles total i n the sample from The Guardian than The Daily Telegraph. One of the more interesting findings was that there were thirteen articles in The Guardian looking at racism in the public discourse on illegal immigration, while there was only one in The Daily Tele graph. Each of the articles in The Guardian decried the use of what they often referred to as race baiting by the conservative parties when attempting to gather support for their anti immigration rhetoric. On the other hand the only article in The Dail y Telegraph discussing race was more concerned that the police would not do their jobs properly for fear of being called racist. These are very different views of the importance of race in the immigration debate and show the differences in ideologies betw een the newspapers.

PAGE 49

49 Along similar lines, the differences between the newspaper on policy issues, especially those of border enforcement and deportation. Articles concerning law and order policies and approaches represented almost half of all of the arti cles in The Daily Telegraph sample, and forty of the forty eight articles framed these policies in a positive way, eight were framed in a neutral way, and none of the articles framed law and order approaches in a negative light. On the other hand there we re thirty articles in The Guardian representing less than thirty percent of the total, and of those articles only five framed these policies in a positive light, where eleven framed them in a negative way. These differences, once again display their ideol ogical differences between the newspapers in the political realm. Illegal immigration is such an important topic that there needs to be further research done on its portrayal in the media. A larger sample of articles would likely be beneficial, perhaps sp anning over a two year period, or during a non election year to mediate the political effect of an election on everyday portrayal of illegal immigrants in the media. This could possibly provide a more representative sample of what is normally represente d in the media without the politically charged atmosphere of an impending election.

PAGE 50

50 LIST OF REFERENCES Appleyard, R. 2001. International Migration Policies: 1950 2000. International Migration 39(6): 7 20. Bade, Klaus J. 2004. Legal and Illegal Immigration into Europe: Experiences and Challenges. European Review 12(3) : 339 375. Burstein, Paul, 2003. The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and An Agenda. Public Opinion Quarterly 56(1): 29 40. Creed, D. E., Langstraat, J.A., and Scully, M.A. 2002. A Picture of the Frame: Frame Analysis as Technique and as Politics. Organizational Research Methods 5(1): 34 55. Dimitrova, Daniela V. and Stromback, Jasper. 2005. Mission Accomplished?: Framing of the Iraq War in the Elite Newspapers in Sweden and the United States. I nternational Journal for Communications Studies 67(5): 399 417. De Vreese, Claes J., and Boomgaarden, Hajo G. 2005. Projecting EU Referendums. European Union Politics 6(1): 59 82. Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn 1998. International No rm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52: 887 917. Gamson, W.A. and Lasch, K.E. 1983. The Political culture of Social Welfare Policy In S.E Spiro and E. Yuchtman Yaar (Ed.). Evaluating the Welfare State: So0cial and Political Perspectives pp. 397 415. New York: Academic Press. House of Commons (HC) Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules. HC503. London: House of Commons. Jordan, Donald L. 1993. Newspaper Effects on Policy Preferences. The Public Opinion Quarterly 57(2): 191 204. King, Russell. 2002. Towards a New Map of European Migration. International Journal of Population Geography 8: 89 106. Luedtke, Adam. 2005. European Immigration, Public Opinion, and Immigration Policy. European Union Politics 6(1): 83 112. Morris, Lydia. 1998. Governing at a Distance: The Elaboration of Controls in British Immigration. International Migration Review 32(4): 949 973. Page, Benjamin I., Shapiro, Robert, Y., and D empsey, Glenn R. 1987. What Moves Public Opinion? American Political Science Review 81: 23 44.

PAGE 51

51 Pan, Zhongdang and Kosicki, Gerald M. 1993. Frame Analysis: An Approach to News Discourse. Political Communications 80: 55 75. Payne, Rodge r A. 2001. Persuasion, Frames and Norm Construction. European Journal of International Relations 7(1): 37 61. Rowlands, Ian, Eisenschitz, Tamara, and Bawden, David 2001. Frame Analysis as a Tool for Understanding Information Policy. Jour nal of Information Science 28: 31 38. Saggar, Shamit. 2003. Immigration and the Politics of Public Opinion. The Political Quarterly 178 194. Segvic, Ivana. 2005. The Framing of Politics: A Content Analysis of Three Croatian Newspap ers. The International Journal for Communication Studies 67(5): 469 488. Simon, Rita J. and Lynch, James P 1999. A Comparative Assessment of Public Opinion Toward Immigrants and Immigration Policies. International Migration Review 33 (2): 455 467. Soroka, Stuart N. 2003. Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy. Press and Politics 3(1): 27 48. The Daily Telegraph. January 2005 November 2005. London England. The Guardian. January 2005 November 2005. London England. Van Gorp, Baldwin. 2005. Where is the Frame?: Victims and Intruders in the Belgian Press Coverage of the Asylum Issue. European Journal of Communication 20(4): 484 507. Van Dijk, T.A. 1988. News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Ya novitsky, Itzhak. 2002. Effects of News Coverage on Policy Attention and Actions. Communication Research 29(4): 422 451

PAGE 52

52 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Beau Niles is a third year sociology graduate student. His research interests include media influence on society as well as racial inequality in the United States. These interests have led to research on newspaper portrayal of immigra tion, especially illegal immigration. He earned his Bachelor of Arts in Sociology and Psychology at Cornell College. He will receive his Master of Arts in Sociology in the Summer of 2007.