Moralizing Immigration: Political Framing, Moral Conviction, and Polarization in the United States and Denmark

Morally charged rhetoric is commonplace in political discourse on immigration but scholars have not examined how it affects divisions over the issue among the public. To address this gap, we employ preregistered survey experiments in two countries where anti-immigration rhetoric has been prominent: the United States and Denmark. We demonstrate that exposure to moralized messages leads respondents to place greater moral weight on their existing immigration opinions and become more averse to political leaders and, in the United States, social interaction partners who espouse opposite beliefs. This suggests that political moralization contributes to moral conflict and affective polarization. We find no evidence, however, that moral framing produces attitudinal polarization—that is, more extreme immigration opinions. Our study helps make sense of the heightened intensity of anti-immigrant politics even when attitudes are stable. It also suggests a promising avenue for comparative research on affective polarization by shifting the focus from partisanship to the moralization of existing issue disagreements.

Undermining Justice: The Political Framing of Actors in the Independent Assessment Process

This article presents findings from a critical discourse analysis of House of Commons debates about the Independent Assessment Process (IAP), an out-of-court compensatory adjudication process intended to resolve claims of sexual and physical abuse that occurred at Indian Residential Schools and one of five key elements of the Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement. Our analysis is guided by the question: What do elected officials’ discussions about the IAP reveal about the implementation of compensatory transitional justice mechanisms in settler colonial states, and about colonial relations (specifically attempts at reconciliation) more generally? Our study focuses on debates that took place between 2004 and 2019. We explored elected officials’ framing of both Survivors and the Canadian State in their discussions about the IAP. Our analysis reveals the limited reach of dialogue based in a partisan and antagonistic context and supports those scholars who assert that transitional justice is incompatible with reconciliation and decolonization. By way of contributing to the larger interdisciplinary study entitled Reconciling Perspectives and Building Public Memory: Learning from the Independent Assessment Process, of which this article is part, we reflect on what our findings mean not only for public memory but also for studying the IAP moving forward.

FRAMING COVID-19: HOW FACT-CHECKING CIRCULATES ON POLITICAL FACEBOOK

This abstract compiles the results of a research on how the political framing of fact-checking posts about Covid-19 may influence their circulation on Facebook. Our research is based on a dataset of 460 fact-checking posts published on politically aligned Brazilian Facebook pages/groups. We used frame analysis to discuss how these posts share fact-checking links. Our results point to the right-wing affiliated groups/pages sharing more fact-checking than left-aligned ones, but using framing strategies to subvert fact-checking content to support their beliefs.These results show that fact-checking does circulate on political Facebook groups/pages that share disinformation (and they circulate on right-wing and conservative ones), but it is used to reinforce their discourse, rather than debunk it.

Governing Genomics

There is no most-compelling approach for governing genomics technologies, There are several possibilities: Governance may be top-down from experts to the public; it may be sideways, through advocacy groups for particular issues; or it may be bottom-up, resulting from an incident or political framing that engages the public. It may, alternatively, not occur much at all, or be dispersed across many separate arena. Many experts see particular genomics arenas as distinct and requiring separate governance structures, while the public mostly sees its possibilities and risks as a unified whole. A further complication is that residents of each quadrant typically prefer different governance structures, although Enthusiasts and the Hopeful, and (separately) Skeptics and Rejecters, agree more than other pairings. Author Jennifer Hochschild explains why she fits more into the Enthusiasm cell than the others. She reasons that excessive caution about what might go wrong makes innovations in societal and individual benefits difficult to achieve, that genomic scientists are ethically sophisticated and capable of learning to mitigate problems, and that concern about risks tends to be abstract and focused on possibilities, whereas benefits tend to be concrete and demonstrable. Nonetheless, however governance moves forward, it will need to monitor possibilities for racial, class, or genetic discrimination.

The Politics of Temporary Protection Schemes: The Role of Mexico’s TVRH in Reproducing Precarity among Central American Migrants

Using Mexico’s Tarjeta de Visitante por Razones Humanitarias (TVRH) as a primary case study, this article examines how states can use temporary protection schemes as border security measures while claiming to provide protection. Although the TVRH offers a legal pathway and status to move within Mexico, it equally restricts certain rights due to its temporary nature. It becomes a form of differential inclusion by which the state has the right to be able to “exclude and define the limits” of a particular population but also claim inclusion on humanitarian grounds. Despite the claim of protecting migrants, the application of this regular status can essentially become a form of interdiction, which sustains the political framing of migration as ultimately a “threat” that needs to be governed. On the ground, migrants with these temporary regular statuses occupy a liminal space and live a precarious existence similar to those migrants who do not possess a legal status at all. This power imbalance exists more often as states prefer to grant a temporary immigration status, which ensures less responsibility and support that accompanies more rights and protections. Based on policy analysis and field work, the article will examine the TVRH, the processes for obtaining this legal status, and the consequences for irregular migrants.

COVID-19 and the Political Framing of China, Nationalism, and Borders in the U.S. and South Korean News Media

Using an inductive framing analysis of news coverage, we examine how the most popular liberal and conservative news media in the United States and South Korea mobilize different nationalist narratives on China in responding to social, economic, and political upheavals during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. We identify three major areas of political cleavage in both Korean and U.S. media discourse on nationalist identities vis-à-vis the construction of the national or racialized “Other.” This includes (1) imagined solidarity against China as an adversary; (2) political disputes over boundary-making; (3) and the construction of ethnonational belonging and exclusion. Our research underscores how intrastate and interstate shifts during periods of crisis can heighten political cleavages along racial and ethnic fault lines and complicate dominant frameworks of civic and ethnic nationalism in both countries.

Institutionalizing school failure: From abandoning to reintroducing a failing grade—the rationales behind Swedish grading reforms

The article aims to depict the political framing of three grading reforms in Swedish compulsory school, in terms of the political problem they are supposed to solve and what kind of attention is given to the lowest performing pupils. Discourse analysis is employed, focusing on statement producers. The empirical material consists of policy documents from the late 1930s to 2010. The analyses show that three cases of the same type of policy change, a new grading system, rely on very different problem representations. The changes were launched as an equality tool, an accountability measure and a remedy for declining results, respectively. The discourse about the least successful pupils differs. Reasonable demands and a ranking scale without a failing grade characterize the introduction of a norm-referenced system; a first criterion-referenced system rests on a belief that virtually all pupils will meet the formulated levels for passing, an expectation not met, and a changed focus behind the second criterion-referenced system normalizes that some pupils will fail compulsory school. The article also illustrates the merits of studying educational policy change through the theoretical lens of problem representations and directs attention to how reforms can have discursive effects as well as unintended side effects that matter substantially for some people.

Concessions for Concession’s Sake: Injustice, Indignation, and the Construction of Intractable Conflict in Israel–Palestine

In intractable conflicts, what factors lead populations to accept negotiated outcomes? To examine these issues, we conduct a survey experiment on a representative sample of the Jewish Israeli population and a companion experiment on a representative sample of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. We find that holding the negotiated settlement outcome constant, approval of the settlement is strongly influenced by whether it is framed as a negotiating defeat for one side—if and only if respondents are primed to be indignant—and that these effects are strongly mediated by perceptions of the fairness of the settlement outcome. Moral indignation produces a desire for concessions for concession’s sake. Such conflicts over political framing violate assumptions of the rationalist literature on conflict processes and suggest important new directions for conflict theorizing.

The Video, the City, and the Spectator: The Architecture and Its Bodies in Front of a Video Camera

This paper is an investigation into the kinds of spectatorial relationships that could be generated when a moving image (video, in this case) presents a city within a political framing. To this end I will analyse three different case studies in which the city—its architecture, and its population—is the polemical common ground of the artwork: Guilty Landscape episode I—Hangzhou by Dries Verhoeven (2016), Sign on a Truck by Jenny Holzer (1984), and Història Urbanística by Video-Nou (1978). In my argumentation, I will adhere generally to Jean Baudrillard’s conceptualisations in terms of media “responsibility”, and those of Jacques Rancière when focused on the term “dissensus”, understood as the essence of politics. Importantly, and worth emphasising, all moving image works are able to mirror the spectator who, through different devices and spatial settings, becomes an active part of the representation itself: and a representation that does not require a form of response is a curtailment that does nothing but amplify the decision-making power of the powerful. Instead, Dries Verhoeven, Jenny Holzer, and Video-Nou confront us with their representations and bid us towards an active personal participation in its construction. Moreover, this could be considered as a reflection upon what might feasibly be achieved today in architecture and urban representation through various new media and their intersections with the moving image and performative arts.