crossingborders
Module 5: Language
“As of today asylum seekers who come here by boat without a visa will never be settled in Australia.”1 Echoing ominously across every news outlet and over social media on the eve of a federal election, PM Kevin Rudd’s latest announcement is a defining moment in Australia’s legacy to refugee and asylum seeker policy. This module briefly explores the language we, our politicians and the media use to talk about this issue and how they form interwoven relationships – how politic rhetoric impacts on public opinion and how we are influenced by the media we consume.
Kevin Rudd – 19 July 2013 “We are a compassionate nation and we will continue to deliver a strong humanitarian program.”1 “There is nothing compassionate about criminal operations which see children and families drowning at sea. Access to our humanitarian program must be through the international organisations which resettle people around the world, not through criminal operators who have pushed people onto unseaworthy vessels with tragic consequences.”1
On the surface, these are compelling statements – they contrast the Opposition’s anxious, alarmist “stop the boat” cries. They seem declarative; this is the portrait of a benevolent government committed to action.
2
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
com-pas-sion
[noun]
Empathy and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others.2 Compassion – a word that is a long-endeared darling of political rhetoric and a persuasive argument that appeals to our desire to be seen as a benevolent, infinitely generous nation. The Greens have long called for us to “find some way of re-introducing some kind of sensible,
practical and compassion back into the debate.” 3 To which Penny Wong replied: “I wish the Greens would stop suggesting that they are the only
ones with compassion…I do think compassion is owed, not only to those in your line of sight, but also to those who are drowning. As a public policy-maker, you have to deal with that.” 3 It’s difficult to argue with compassion. But to agree that deaths at sea are tragic, that our compassion for those who drown must compel us to construct a policy that adequately prevents those deaths, do not justify the kind of deterrent policies that have been managed thus far. Deterrent policies have been shown time and time again not to work. They are expensive. They represent a breach of our international obligations7. Like the Pacific Solution, the PNG deal – which offloads asylum seekers onto a country receiving humanitarian aid from Australia to invest in improving health – has a disastrous impact on the health of asylum seekers.4 Remember that there are women and children fleeing from PNG itself. And tellingly, there is nothing “compassionate” about the cold threat: “If you come here by boat without a visa, you won’t be settled in Australia” – published in the Sydney Morning Herald, naturally the most strategic outlet for this advertisement!5
3
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
A Business Model “…we need to be flexible enough to anticipate and match their actions to avoid the terrible consequences of this trade.”1 “If people are paying thousands and thousands of dollars to a people smuggler they are buying a ticket to a country other than Australia.”1 The popular ‘business model’ analogy seen here places the issue of refugees and asylum seekers within an ‘economically inspired framework’.6 Refusing to settle refugees allegedly makes the ‘product’ offered by people smugglers (ie. a means to flee persecution) less ‘attractive’, thus ‘undermining people smugglers’ source of “profit”.6 The language is reductive and dehumanizing; ‘dismantling’ the business model as code for sending vulnerable people to impoverished Papua New Guinea, is far less likely to provoke moral outrage. Not only does this artificially reduce a complex, global issue to a question of how to stop the simplistically described people smuggling ‘trade’, it alludes to the myth that refugees are economic migrants (Consider the motivation for this. Could it be that given their inability to vilify asylum seekers, politicians frame the issue around people smugglers and preventing “deaths at sea”?).
Now questioning the legitimacy of their asylum claims, we are less likely to be moved by the plight of the participants of this ‘trade’, who are simultaneously denounced as ‘queue jumpers’ or ‘illegal immigrants’. This branding of asylum seekers who apply onshore as illegitimate and the implicit accusation that they are evading the ‘proper channels’ is so often uncritically adopted by reporters, and of course disregards the fact that applying onshore is the “standard” procedure for seeking asylum.' Moreover whilst people smuggling is undeniably a business transaction, its focus and characterization, unintentionally or not, perpetuates a misleading misconception about the parties involved. Why does being able to afford “thousands and thousands of dollars” disqualify people from gaining asylum in Australia? Because they are “buying a ticket” to jump the queue of proper processing by “international organisations”? Notwithstanding the fact that many asylum seekers sell all their possessions in order to afford the smuggling fee, this logic ignores the facts that there is no orderly queue and that persecution transcends socio-economic divides. Empathy cripples this self-righteous argument – if it was you living in terror and if you had enough money to pay a people smuggler, would you act any differently?
4
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
“Swamped” The Daily Telegraph, sadly not a lone voice, would have us believe that we are drowning in a deluge of people applying for our protection. An unabridged version of the front page article on 26/11/11 read:
‘Thousands of boat people will be released into Sydney’s suburbs as the government empties detention centres’ In response to the barrage of headlines and articles published by the Daily Telegraph, the Australian Press Council came forward condemning the use of the word ‘invade’ given ‘its clear connotations of forceful
occupation’ (APC) and the words ‘open the floodgates’ and ‘deluge’ as unfounded and unjustifiable7. Yet sensationalist headlines like this are only too prevalent. Bylines such as ‘Thousands of boat people to invade NSW’ exaggerate the perceived threat of refugees to Australian resources, culture and values and the absurd notion that treating refugees with humanity might tear at the fabric of our society and lead to a collapse of the employment market. Meanwhile, the ominous ‘THEY’RE HERE’ fails to recognize the disparity between the realistic ‘risk’ – and I hesitate to use even that given how marginal this is - and symbolic threat posed by refugees.8 Certain newspaper outlets would have us believe that we are being ‘swamped’/‘inundated’ by a ‘mass
exodus’/‘latest waves’ of refugees/a homogenous ‘human tide’ 9. The imagery is terrifying; despite the fact that last year Australia received less than 1% of the world’s asylum applications10, the fantasy that boat arrivals might overwhelm our border control takes hold of the imagination.10 The motivation for this style of sensationalist reporting is up for contention; perhaps it can be explained by the theory that sensationalism sells. Regardless, such rhetoric evokes terror in readers, and the conversation seamlessly morphs into ‘what steps can we take to secure our borders?’ Christopher Pyne unapologetically told Q&A audiences last Monday that border security was a far pertinent issue than marriage equality for the Coalition in this election – a clear message that, more important than the civic equality of all Australians, is our priority to protect ourselves from being ‘invaded’ by an ‘armada’* of vulnerable people in rickety boats! There is something undeniably sinister about justifying and validating any degree heavy-handed policy on the insinuation and outright accusation that that asylum seekers represent a violent adversary threatening to jeopardise our national security
*ar·ma·da [noun]. A fleet of warships
5
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
Loaded language aside, other criticisms can be made of the media portrayal of this issue. Contrast the coverage dedicated to politicians’ slander and UNHCR reports ranking Australia as 47th on the list of refugee-host countries11 or the contributions of former refugees to Australian society. This bias in reporting, which loses sight of the broader, global picture, is arguably just as reckless as publishing factual inaccuracies. In her journal article, Common Sense and Original Deviancy: News Discourses and Asylum
Seekers in Australia, Sharon Pickering describes the media representation of asylum seekers and refugees as being ‘dominated by binary logic’ .12 She argues that the polarisation of asylum seekers – refugees vs boat people, law abiding vs criminal, legal vs illegal – fuels misinformed ‘discourses of illegality and legality’. Despite the fact the refugee convention prohibits discriminating asylum seekers based on the mode of their arrival,13 such descriptions reinforce the myth of the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ refugee and encourage hostility towards asylum seekers who, legally, arrive by boat. February 2000: a group of asylum seekers at Curtin Detention Centre go on hunger strike and sew their lips to protest their inhumane detention. Australian media coverage in the following days dismisses this deeply unsettling incident as something of a curiosity; a ‘bizarre’ or ‘gruesome’ story which receives less coverage than the story of a ‘feisty ferret’ that bit a Queensland policeman’s genitals.14 ‘Thin on detail, context and analysis’, ‘the hunger strike failed to prompt the Australian media to take a serious look at conditions in the camp, or fundamentally to question the policy of mandatory detention’.14 This reactive style of reporting unfailingly devotes front pages to the arrival of new boats carrying asylum seekers but neglects to report the continued presence of refugees in camps awaiting resettlement. Furthermore it is notable for its absence of ‘carefully researched critique’ 15. What does a negative ASIO finding actually mean in terms of security risk posed? Does the number of asylum claims received by Australia reflect global trends? There is a complexity missing from the current conversation because questions such as these go unasked.
6
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
7
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
A New Game Plan With this kind of unscrupulous political rhetoric dominating our language, Tony Abbott’s latest policy announcement comes as no surprise.
“The essential point is, this is our country we determine who comes here”.16 A chilling echo of the Howard era, his proposed policy means that 32,000 asylum seekers who have already arrived in Australia by boat, in detention or on bridging visas will be denied the right to ever settle in Australia. Moreover, refugees will no longer be able to appeal to the courts, with the removal of the refugee review tribunal – who found the proportion of asylum seekers granted refugee status to be 90%, an increase from 65.3% before court appeals. Lawyer and human rights activist, Kellie Tranter, laments that: ‘There was a time in this country, after the fall of the South Vietnamese
Government and the ensuing exodus of refugees, that scoring points of domestic political importance involved an Opposition denouncing the Government’s refugee program as marked by inhumanity and extreme restrictions’. 15 As difficult as it is to recall such a time, it serves as a reminder that aspiring towards an enhanced ethics in politics is not futile. Politicians have an alternative to stirring up anti-asylum seeker sentiment in order to secure political power. Indeed, they have a responsibility to reject negative stereotyping and end stigmatisation of asylum seekers. 15 Amidst the provocative headlines, the Four Corners episode, No Advantage: Inside Australia's
Offshore Processing Centres, stands as an example of principled journalism that raises important questions about policy towards asylum seekers, particularly in regard to Australia’s policy of offshore processing. These policies are not immutable and media scrutiny is crucial to instigating change.
8
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
action & resources
Xenophobia – media and politics: http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/docs/resources/2010_ARRA_Xenophobia.pdf
Analysis of the Rudd’s advertising campaign – full of clarity and precision. Waleedy Aly: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/png-‐asylum-‐policy-‐ harsh-‐but-‐may-‐not-‐succeed-‐20130725-‐2qn6x.html
Julian Burnside debunks the myths, analyses ‘deterrent policy’: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-‐politics/political-‐opinion/youve-‐been-‐misled-‐on-‐boat-‐ people-‐here-‐are-‐the-‐facts-‐20130718-‐2q5rv.html
Refugee Action Collective – Protest – 24 Aug 1pm State library : https://www.facebook.com/events/545163988866871/ For an in-‐depth analysis of the representation of asylum seekers as a 'deviant' population, see Sharon Pickering's thoughts: http://statecrime.org/wp-‐ content/uploads/2011/10/pickering2001a.pdf Seeking Refuge in Nhil is a photographic exhibition at the Immigration Museum in Melbourne open until January 2014: http://museumvictoria.com.au/immigrationmuseum/whatson/current-‐exhibitions/seeking-‐ refuge-‐in-‐nhill/ Impact of Long Term Detention: A discussion-‐based session which will explore the impact of detention and the asylum seeking process for refugee survivors of torture and trauma, including an overview of current research. Registration is essential. Date: 12 September, 4pm -‐ 7pm at Foundation House, 6 Gardiner St Brunswick Cost: $50 http://www.trybooking.com/Booking/BookingEventSummary.aspx?eid=51083
9
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan
references
1.
Australia Politics. Rudd’s Boat People Policy: All Asylum Seekers To Be Sent To PNG [homepage on the Internet]. 2013 July 19 [cited 2013 Aug 16]. Available from: http://australianpolitics.com/2013/07/19/rudd-‐png-‐solution.html
2.
Wikipedia. Compassion. [cited 2013 Aug 16] Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion
3.
Q&A. Transcript of Costing, Conski and Cab Rides. 2013 Aug 12 [cited 2013 Aug 16] Available from: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3810038.htm
4.
Asylum Seeker Resource Centre. No to offshore processing – community processing is the solution. [cited 2013 Aug 16] Available from: http://www.asrc.org.au/campaigns/1-‐end-‐mandatory-‐detention/
5.
SBS News. Ads needed to stop boat people: Bowen. 2013 Jul 20 [cited 2013 Aug 16] Available from: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1791002/Ads-‐needed-‐to-‐stop-‐boat-‐people-‐Bowen
6.
Zerilli J. Boat people economics 101: exploring the flawed logic of asylum seeker policy. The Conversation [Internet]. 2012 Dec 19 [cited 2013 Aug 16]; Available from: http://theconversation.edu.au/boat-‐people-‐economics-‐101-‐exposing-‐the-‐flawed-‐logic-‐ of-‐asylum-‐seeker-‐policy-‐11159
7.
Australian Press Council. Adjudication No. 1536: Anna Krjatian/The Daily Telegraph (May 2012). Sydney: Australian Press Council; 2012 Jun 5 Available from: http://www.presscouncil.org.au/document-‐search/adj-‐ 1536/?LocatorGroupID=662&LocatorFormID=677&FromSearch=1
8.
Schweitzer R, Perkoulidis S, Krome S, Ludlow C, Ryan M. Attitudes towards Refugees: The Dark Side of Prejudice in Australia.
Australian Journal of Psychology [Internet]. 2005; 57(3):170-‐179. Available from: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/3878/1/3878_1.pdf
9.
Corderoy A. Fanning the flames of asylum seeker policy. Daily Life [Internet]. 2012 Dec 13 [cited 2013 Aug 16]; Available from: http://www.dailylife.com.au/health-‐and-‐fitness/dl-‐wellbeing/fanning-‐the-‐flames-‐of-‐asylum-‐seeker-‐fear-‐20121212-‐2b97p.html
10. ASRC. Myth busters summary. West Melbourne: ASRC; 2012 Aug; Available from: http://www.asrc.org.au/media/documents/myth-‐busters-‐summary-‐Aug2012.pdf 11. UNHCR. Global Trends 2011. Geneva: UNHCR; 2012 Jun 8 12. Pickering S. Common Sense and Original Deviancy: News Discourses and Asylum Seekers in Australia. Journal of Refugee Studies. 2001;14(2). 13. UNHCR. The Refugee Convention, 1951. Geneva: UNHCR; 1951. Available from: http://www.unhcr.org/4ca34be29.pdf 14. Mares P. The media and asylum seekers in Australia. WACC [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2013 Aug 17]; Available from: http://www.waccglobal.org/en/20013-‐communication-‐and-‐cultural-‐identity-‐in-‐asia/729-‐The-‐media-‐and-‐asylum-‐seekers-‐in-‐ Australia.html 15. Tranter K. The portrayal of refugees and asylum seekers during election campaigns [Internet]. 2013 Apr 29 [cited 2013 Aug 16]. Available from: http://kellietranter.com/2013/04/the-‐portrayal-‐of-‐asylum-‐seekers-‐and-‐refugees-‐during-‐election-‐ campaigns/ 16. Tony Abbott. Interview with Ray Hadley, Radio 2GB, Sydney. 2013 Aug 16 [cited 2013 Aug 17] . Available from: http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/News/tabid/94/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/9397/Interview-‐with-‐Ray-‐Hadley-‐Radio-‐ 2GB-‐Sydney.aspx
10
Crossing Borders. Module 5: Language [22 Aug 2013] Hui-‐Ling Yeoh & Nishani Nithianadan