A media frame analysis of xeno-racism after Brexit

Abstract

After the Brexit referendum on 23 June 2016, there was an increase in violence against people perceived as ‘the other’. This paper addresses the question of how this outburst was framed in British Newspapers and discusses the consequences of this framing. How newspapers frame xeno-racist violence has an impact on how it is understood in society - and what potential solutions are discussed. This paper’s thesis is that in their framing of xeno-racist violence, the analysed newspapers fail to fully contextualise the violence within structural xeno-racism. Frame analysis is employed to detect and analyse the frames in eight analysed articles: The Brexit Frame, the Structural Xeno-Racism Frame, the Bad Apple Frame and the Press Responsibility Frame. While authors in the Guardian argue that resentments against those perceived as ‘the other’ existed before Brexit, only one article clearly contextualises xeno-racist violence within its underlying structures. In neither the Guardian, nor the Telegraph, structural xeno-racism is consistently understood to be essential in the contextualisation of xeno-racist violence. One of the discussed consequences of this paper’s findings ist that, through the employment of frames, authors explicitly or implicitly point to a ‘guilty party’. The Bad Apple Frame identifies ‘bad’ individuals as the problem - relieving non-violent citizens and politicians of any responsibility. As most readers of the Guardian had voted to remain, employing the Brexit Frame - especially putting blame on the Leave campaign - can be understood to exonerate most Guardian readers of any responsibility. Only a thorough employment of a Structural Xeno-Racism Frame - reporting on xeno-racist violence and including its structural context - would not offer the possibility for authors to distance themselves and (indirectly) their readers from the issue, as long as they profit from privilege.