Fulltext Thesis (708.5Kb)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Mag. Andrea Frauscher MAS The Contribution of Intercultural Media to Pluralism and Diversity in the Public Discourse: Necessary Voices in Contemporary Democratic Society – The Case of Austria E.MA European Masters Programme for Human Rights and Democratisation Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Centre Perelman de Philosophie du Droit Supervision: Dr. Pierre-François Docquir Academic Year 2010/2011, July 2011 Acknowledgement Thanks to Pierre-François Docquir for his excellent supervision and all the others, who shared their thoughts and accompanied me. ii Abstract One of the most important challenges for our present society is the increase in ethnic and social heterogeneity, which also implies great effects on our communication. The democratic ideal of giving all people an equal voice in the decisions affecting them is getting harder to fulfil in the face of a heterogenic population, as there can be the risk that less influential and powerful groups such as migrants or ethnic groups have less possibilities to raise their voices. The media provide the public sphere for negotiating democratic decisions, but often have difficulty in offering equal access. I argue that adequate access for groups in society that have traditionally had disadvantaged access to the media such as migrants is crucial for the democratic discourse. I also advocate that intercultural media giving migrants and ethnic groups a voice in the public arena, could help mitigate the risk described above. The main characteristic of intercultural media is diversity. Firstly, they are produced by ethnic groups of different origins. Secondly, they address an audience with and without a migration background. Thirdly, the content is created with the particular perspective of their ethnic producers, mostly in the language of the host country. I will demonstrate my argument using the case of Austria, whose media are a “murky mirror” of the existing diversity of the country. Media concentration, a variety of channels without a real diversity of reflected opinions, unequal power relations are reasons that deprive the migrant population of adequate participation and representation in the public sphere. However, the state has responsibility to provide an environment for a media system that reflects the existing diversity in a country and does not disadvantage certain groups such as migrants. Human rights underscore this duty of the state to guarantee the right of freedom of expression, stressing the negative, but as well the positive obligations. The theoretical reasoning and the findings of the mapping of intercultural media in Austria illustrate that intercultural media hold a huge potential for a more democratic discourse, as they allow access to the public sphere for migrants, offer opportunities for self-representation, provide information with an intercultural focus for a general audience, create a bridging function, counter discriminatory reporting and strengthen the quality of media pluralism. iii List of Abbreviations AGTT Arbeitsgemeinschaft Teletest (Workinggroup Teletest) CE Council of Europe EC European Commission ECHR European Court for Human Rights ECHR Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NWICO New World Information and Communication Order ÖAK Österreichische Auflagenkontrolle (Austrian Circulation Control) ORF Österreichischer Rundfunk (Austrian Public Broadcaster) UN United Nations UN OHCHR - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development VÖZ Verein Österreichischer Zeitungen (Austrian Newspaper Association) WAN World Association of Newspapers WAZ Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung iv Table of Figures Figure 1: The functions of mass media, in Burkart, 1994, p. 382.................................. 35 Figure 2: Main characteristics of intercultural media..................................................... 54 Figure 3: Silvana Meixner & Lakis Ioordanopoulos present Heimat, Fremde Heimat.. 71 Figure 4: www.dastandard.at (Screenshot taken 8 June 2011). ..................................... 73 Figure 5: Selection of cover of the Vienna city magazine biber – mit scharf. ............... 75 Figure 6: okto.tv (Screenshot taken 7 July 2011)........................................................... 81 v Table of Contents INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................1 A THE AUSTRIAN MEDIA – A MURKY MIRROR OF THE EXISTING DIVERSITY...........6 1 ETHNIC DIVERSITY IN AUSTRIA ......................................................................................................6 1.1 A Reluctant Migration Country ............................................................................................6 1.2 Here to Stay ..........................................................................................................................8 1.3 ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Minorities ................................................................................................10 2 A HIGHLY CONCENTRATED MEDIA LANDSCAPE ..........................................................................11 2.1 The Influential Voice of the Largest Tabloid ......................................................................12 2.2 The Domination of the Public Service Broadcaster ...........................................................14 2.3 Press and Broadcasters also Lead Online..........................................................................16 3 MAINSTREAM MEDIA – A DIFFICULT SPACE FOR MIGRANTS .......................................................17 3.1 Reduction to a “Problem Case”.........................................................................................17 3.2 Low Migrant Voices............................................................................................................19 4 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................21 B ENABLING MULTI-ETHNIC PUBLIC SPHERES...................................................................23 1 DEFINING THE PUBLIC SPHERE .....................................................................................................23 2 RETHINKING THE PUBLIC SPHERE .................................................................................................25 2.1 Exclusion and Inequality ....................................................................................................25 2.2 A Multiplicity of Public Spheres.........................................................................................27 3 MULTI -ETHNIC PUBLIC SPHERES ..................................................................................................29 3.1 Acknowledging Diversity in a Democracy..........................................................................29 3.2 Need for a Democratisation of the Media ..........................................................................31 4 THE IMPORTANCE OF MEDIA IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY ............................................................33 4.1 Functions of Media.............................................................................................................33 4.2 Media Pluralism and a System of Representation ..............................................................36 4.3 An Alternative Sphere.........................................................................................................38 5 A RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE ? .......................................................................................................41 5.1 State Responsibility.............................................................................................................41 5.2 Solidarity ............................................................................................................................42 5.3 The Debate on the Right to Communicate..........................................................................43 5.4 The MacBride Report .........................................................................................................46 5.5 ECHR Advocating for Equal Participation in Public Discourse........................................48 6 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................50 vi C INTERCULTURAL MEDIA – GIVING A VOICE TO MIGRANTS ......................................52 1 DIVERSITY : A KEY CHARACTERISTIC FOR INTERCULTURAL MEDIA .............................................52 1.1 Definition and Differentiation ............................................................................................52 1.2 Content and Topics Covered ..............................................................................................55 2 MEDIA INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS .............................................................................................58 3 FROM GUEST WORKER -RADIO TO TRANSCULTURAL MEDIA ........................................................62 3.1 The Development of Media Products for Migrants ............................................................62 3.1.1 Phase 1: Guest worker Press and Guest worker-Radio................................................................