Book Review is published on SLO pages.

Book Review is published on SLO pages.

At a time in which the European Union is fortifying its borders in order to prevent “undesired” migrants from entering its territory, Gregory Feldman’s book The Migration Apparatus: Security, Labor and Policymaking in the European Union, published by the Stanford University Press in 2012, is of invaluable importance for understanding the mechanisms governing EU policymaking on migration. In this book, Feldman maps EU migration poli­cies and their development in the context of global economic inequality from an ethnographic point of view, using a Foucauldian approach.

At a time in which the European Union is fortifying its borders in order to prevent “undesired” migrants from entering its territory, Gregory Feldman’s book The Migration Apparatus: Security, Labor and Policymaking in the European Union, published by the Stanford University Press in 2012, is of invaluable importance for understanding the mechanisms governing EU policymaking on migration. In this book, Feldman maps EU migration poli­cies and their development in the context of global economic inequality from an ethnographic point of view, using a Foucauldian approach.

The paper analyses reporting about the “refugee crisis” in Slovenia's three main daily newspapers Delo, Dnevnik and Večer in the first weeks of mass migrations through the country that were named “the first and the second wave of refugees” by the journalists. The analysis focuses on the question of framing and on the dominant journalistic conventions through which objectivity is performed. The paper tries to reflect on the paradox in reporting these issues where the problem is dominantly framed in terms of humanitarian crisis on the explicit level and rarely as a security issue but on the connotative level factism and episodic framing suggest another reading of the problem that supports the fear of the imigrants. What is more, examples of more engaged reporting can be found where archetypal figures of heroes are called upon and where daily news functions similar as myth. 
KEY WORDS: refugee crisis, migrations, journalistic conventions, quality press, objectivity, factism

The paper analyses reporting about the “refugee crisis” in Slovenia's three main daily newspapers Delo, Dnevnik and Večer in the first weeks of mass migrations through the country that were named “the first and the second wave of refugees” by the journalists. The analysis focuses on the question of framing and on the dominant journalistic conventions through which objectivity is performed. The paper tries to reflect on the paradox in reporting these issues where the problem is dominantly framed in terms of humanitarian crisis on the explicit level and rarely as a security issue but on the connotative level factism and episodic framing suggest another reading of the problem that supports the fear of the imigrants. What is more, examples of more engaged reporting can be found where archetypal figures of heroes are called upon and where daily news functions similar as myth. 
KEY WORDS: refugee crisis, migrations, journalistic conventions, quality press, objectivity, factism

The article starts with the thesis that metaprocesses of mediatisation define the operation of the media to the degree that “media logic” follows political agendas. We verify the thesis based on a qua­litative analysis of journalistic commentary (editorials) that were published in the Slovenian daily newspaper Delo (August–December 2015) on the topic of European migration policy (quota system, Schengen regime, bilateral agreements etc.). The analysis shows that migration policy is legitimized by commentary that omits the views of non-governmental sources and is largely based on Eurocentric imaginings of Europe.
KEY WORDS: migration policy, Schengen, quota system, Europe, journalistic commentary

The article starts with the thesis that metaprocesses of mediatisation define the operation of the media to the degree that “media logic” follows political agendas. We verify the thesis based on a qua­litative analysis of journalistic commentary (editorials) that were published in the Slovenian daily newspaper Delo (August–December 2015) on the topic of European migration policy (quota system, Schengen regime, bilateral agreements etc.). The analysis shows that migration policy is legitimized by commentary that omits the views of non-governmental sources and is largely based on Eurocentric imaginings of Europe.
KEY WORDS: migration policy, Schengen, quota system, Europe, journalistic commentary

In this article I investigate the representation of the “refugee problem” in the Odmevi current affairs program on Slovenian national TV. I aim to explore how conventional, naturalized codes and neutralism as a constitutive element of professional self-presentation in political journalism determined the treatment of the “refugee problem”. In this context, I analyze the selection of external or “accessed” voices in the Odmevi studio interview, the discursive framing of interviewees and their placement into the show’s narrative. The main findings are a) that the selection and b) the discursive treatment of studio guests in Odmevi’s interviews caused or rather enabled the debate on the “refugee problem” to be narrowed to the sphere of legitimate controversy represented by partisan politics. The selection and treatment of accessed voices (interviewees and guests) created the so-called opinion or discursive tunnel, which consequently led to the complete symbolical marginalization of all views that fell outside the parliamentary mainstream and its interests, and hence to treating the problem as a mere sequence of events.
KEY WORDS: refugees, tv interview, neutralism, accessed voices, conversation analysis

In this article I investigate the representation of the “refugee problem” in the Odmevi current affairs program on Slovenian national TV. I aim to explore how conventional, naturalized codes and neutralism as a constitutive element of professional self-presentation in political journalism determined the treatment of the “refugee problem”. In this context, I analyze the selection of external or “accessed” voices in the Odmevi studio interview, the discursive framing of interviewees and their placement into the show’s narrative. The main findings are a) that the selection and b) the discursive treatment of studio guests in Odmevi’s interviews caused or rather enabled the debate on the “refugee problem” to be narrowed to the sphere of legitimate controversy represented by partisan politics. The selection and treatment of accessed voices (interviewees and guests) created the so-called opinion or discursive tunnel, which consequently led to the complete symbolical marginalization of all views that fell outside the parliamentary mainstream and its interests, and hence to treating the problem as a mere sequence of events.
KEY WORDS: refugees, tv interview, neutralism, accessed voices, conversation analysis