Sometimes journalistic professional autonomy is also called journalistic independence. It is a normative concept that assumes that journalists should be completely independent of external structures and power actors in their work. Journalistic professional autonomy is important for journalism to fulfil its democratic function and the means by which journalistic independence and professionalism are manifested. It affords a degree of independence and the opportunity for journalists to make their own decisions. If practitioners of journalism fail to maintain independence from those they cover or if they are unable to serve as independent monitors of power, the content they create ceases to be professional journalism. Journalistic autonomy can be determined by many factors: the character of ownership, level of democracy, nature of the media system, individual characteristics of journalists, or the editorial team’s management style. Henrik Örnebring and Michael Karlsson distinguish journalistic autonomy at three different analytical levels: (1) institutional, referring to the fact that journalists should be independent of other social institutions; (2) individual, referring to the fact that journalists should have the space to make decisions about their work based on their own deliberations; and (3) organizational, referring to the fact that individual decisions can be influenced by the nature of the processes in the newsroom. 

The definition of the (social) responsibility of journalism/media is based on the conclusions of the so-called Hutchins Commission, sometimes known as the Commission on Freedom of the Press. This was set up in Britain in 1942 as a body to define the role of the media in a modern democracy. It was established at the instigation of Time magazine publisher Henry Luce, primarily in response to criticism of the media by the public and politicians (and also as a reaction to war propaganda during WWII). It sat until 1947 and its output was a list of five values that the media should fulfil: (1) give a truthful, comprehensive, and intelligent account of the day’s events in a context which gives them meaning; (2) be a forum for the exchange of comment and criticism; (3) project a representative picture of the constituent groups in society; (4) present and clarify the goals and values of society; (5) give full access to the day’s intelligence. Social responsibility theory, as articulated in the book Four Theories of the Press, takes a similar view of the social responsibility of journalism. This theory views the media not only from a commercial perspective, but also sees it as a tool that can be used to ensure the delivery of quality information to citizens and represent all sections of society. In addition, this theory envisages that if the media fails in its role, the state regulatory authority can step in and enforce it. Both conceptions of the (social) responsibility of journalism are inherently normative and are particularly typical for liberal democracy.

Journalistic roles describe ideas about what function journalists should have in society and serve as a way of legitimizing the existence of journalism in society. According to Thomas Hanitzsch, journalistic roles consist of four categories: normative role, cognitive role, practiced role, and narrative role.

In the case of the normative perspective, the existence of journalism is seen as essential to the existence of democracy and the role of journalists is to provide people with accurate and verifiable information that can contribute to making informed political decisions. In this regard, Karol Jakubowicz mentions three normative functions of journalism: the civic role, the watchdog role of democracy, and the mobilizing role, which consists in the fact that the media seeks to mobilize citizens to be more curious about politics and to encourage participation. This does not mean, however, that all three normative roles are demanded in the same way in all countries around the world – typically the watchdog role is suppressed in authoritarian societies. The cognitive role of journalism, then, deals with what journalists themselves think their role is, and this idea does not always necessarily correspond with the normative idea of journalism, as the lived experience of the individual is taken into consideration. The practiced role refers to what the performance of journalists actually looks like, and the narrated role refers to journalists’ subjective reflections and perceptions of that performance.

Online branding of journalists refers to a situation where a journalist presents his or her work to a wide audience through social networks sites and other online tools. Social networks sites, by their very nature, mediate a direct exchange of information between the producer and consumer of content, allowing journalists to communicate with their readers independently of the media house that employs them. The second essential characteristic of social networks sites is that it is possible to build one’s own online identity within them. Indeed, as Danah Boyd and Nicole B. Elisson note, social networks sites have an egocentric design and their centrepiece is therefore not topics but people.

But by blurring the line between what is private and what is public, social networks sites raise the question of what information journalists should share and how much they can afford to express their opinions. Equally challenging for them is the balancing between appearing authentic to the audience while also complying with organizational pressure from their employers, who often want them to represent the media outlet through their profiles, thus aiding the corporate marketing of that media house.

It is also typical that media houses tend to interfere in journalists’ communication with their audiences and set the rules according to which they can operate on social networks sites; journalists have to admit in their “bio” which media house they are part of.

Migration and forced displacement are among the most pressing issues of global society and politics. According to the Migration Data Portal, over 280 million people globally were migrants or refugees in 2020, an unprecedented number and an increase of almost 130 million compared to 1990. In the European context, the news media agenda has focused more intently on the issue since the so-called “refugee crisis” of 2015.

It is believed that journalistic coverage of these issues has significant effects on how society perceives migrants and refugees. Consequently, actors such as NGOs often point towards the high responsibility of news outlets when reporting on migration and forced displacement, for example regarding professional ethics. This includes the importance of using correct terminologies. The 2018 United Nations’ Global Compact for Migration calls for independent, objective and quality reporting by media outlets on these issues.

However, scholarly research has pointed towards an often conflict-oriented and elite-focussed coverage of migration and forced displacement in European media, which often neglects the voices of migrants and refugees themselves. According to studies, the contents of migration coverage tend to ignore the complex contextual factors of migration and forced displacement.

Moreover, research on how African and European outlets cover the topic demonstrate shortcomings related to the geographies of news, with perspectives being rather one-dimensional and self-centred, often following the logics of domestication. Consequently, covering migration and forced displacement is believed to be a suitable topic for cross-border journalism.

Several publications and online manuals have been created in recent years to support journalists covering migration and forced displacement. These include, among many others, the Covering Migration Toolkit by Minority Rights Group International, the Labour Migration Guidance for Journalists of the International Labour Organization (ILO), the Migration Reporting Guidelines of the Global Investigative Journalism Network, and the UNESCO Handbook for Journalism Educators about Reporting on Migrants and Refugees.

While journalists covering migration and forced displacement should be aware of many terms and definitions, distinguishing between migrants and refugees is particularly crucial for responsible reporting, though it is not an easy undertaking. From a legal perspective, refugees enjoy specific protections under international law, whereas the rights of migrants are not as far-reaching.

As a basic distinction, refugees have been forcedto leave their homes, as they face persecution for reasons such as race, religion, nationality, or political opinion. They may flee from war or armed conflict. Their freedom or life is threatened, and they cannot assume that their national government will respect their human rights and ensure their physical safety. However, they can expect the international community to grant that protection, as outlined by international law in the United Nations Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. Refugees may not be deported back to the country where their lives or freedoms are threatened (non-refoulement).

The term migrant, by contrast, is not as clearly defined. Simply put, international migrants decide to leave their home country voluntarily. They may assume that their national government guarantees their human rights and safety. Yet, this does not imply that they do not have sound reasons to depart. Migrants might be fleeing from natural disasters or economic crises, and might face various vulnerabilities, too. At any rate, the reasons for migrants to leave are heterogeneous, including the wish to improve one’s economic situation, or to follow one’s family abroad. While the rights of refugees are precisely stated in international law, there are no clear-cut international regulations on how to treat migrants. Nation states have the right to determine their national migration and border policies. They may freely decide on which migrants they allow to enter based on national laws. In general, migrants have the chance to properly plan and prepare to leave home, whereas refugees must often flee unprepared and with only personal belongings.

Another distinction journalists should be aware of is that between refugees and asylum seekers: the latter are individuals who have applied for formal international protection under the status of refugees, but whose cases have not yet been decided. While asylum seekers are often subsumed into the group of refugees, legally speaking they have not yet been granted this status. Asylum seekers are among the so-called persons of concern that the UNHCR, the UN refugee agency, is responsible for. These also include internally displaced people (IDPs), understood as persons who have been forced to leave their homes but have not crossed an international border. Another group is so-called stateless people, persons who are not considered as nationals by any state.

Other terms journalists should be sensitized to are irregular migrants, meaning those who cross borders without valid documents such as a visa, and overstayers, i.e. migrants who stay in a country after their visa has expired. Such persons are often called irregular migrants (in contrast to illegal migrants, a term that is deemed to undermine their dignity and respect for human rights).

In covering migration and forced displacement, ethical debates on news content and journalistic performance are frequent. This has been demonstrated, for example, by the case of Alan Shenu (often reported as Aylan Kurdi) who was found drowned on a beach in Turkey in 2015. As the picture of his corpse made it to the covers of newspapers worldwide, there was a fierce debate on whether showing this image now turned iconic was inadequate, or rather inevitable to call the worlds’ attention to the ongoing tragedy of shipwrecking in the Mediterranean Sea.

Being a controversial and emotionally charged issue in many countries, journalists covering migration and forced displacement and their reporting have come under attack from anti-migration groups in society, which may put them in challenging situations. While often helpful to get access to groups of migrants and refugees, NGOs such as aid organizations or pro-immigrant civil society groups may have vested interests and try to instrumentalize media coverage as well. Of course, political or government agendas on migration and forced displacement, whether hidden or not, must be questioned by journalists as well.

As issues of migration and forced displacement are a common topic of “fake news” and misinformation, fact-checking is of great importance in this field. The European Federation of Journalists urges reporters covering these issues to challenge myths and stereotypes. Also, the organization suggests writing not about a “migrant or refugee crisis”, but rather about a crisis of “migrant policy”, to avoid making the people a problem and shed light on the broader context. Moreover, terminologies are important for journalists to follow, in order to provide adequate reporting.

There is also criticism of a tendency to one-sidedly depict migrants and refugees as victims, rather than as (groups of) individuals acting in their own right. This image of migrants and refuges might be due to the topical focus of media coverage on catastrophes and tragedies, or on conflicts and (culture) clashes between migrant communities and the (assumed) majority group in society, rather than on the contextual factors, causes and consequences of migration and forced displacement. Consequently, it has been suggested that migration and forced displacement is particularly suited for a “constructive journalism” or solutions-oriented approach, as well as for collaborative cross-border journalism, as it is a topic which is both global and local at the same time.

The media focus on migrants and refugees as criminals has also been challenged. Other observers take issue with the depiction of migrants or refugees as heroes, ultimately “othering” them.

The protagonists of stories on migration and forced displacement may be traumatized, which can make interviews difficult. Also, journalists themselves can be traumatized by their reporting. Situations that are challenging from a professional ethics point of view may also arise when journalists are asked by their interviewees for some kind of support, be it money, food, help in their asylum-seeking processes, or even smuggling to another country.

The international networks of actors active within and related to the field of migration and forced displacement are complex and highly interconnected. Research has diagnosed a tendency to see migrants and refugees as victims, depicted as large anonymous groups in media coverage, rather than as individuals with agency, and even driving forces of globalization and transnational social practices. Subsequently, there are demands for a greater inclusion of migrants and refugees as actors in their own right within media coverage of migration and forced displacement.

Despite the impact of globalization, nation states are still viewed as major players in the field of policies on migration and forced displacement. Even in a strong supranational organization such as the European Union (EU), considerable authority in this field of policy is reserved for the member states, and the EU’s attempts to create a common asylum system have been criticized on the grounds of its perceived inefficiency. In this regard, media coverage on migration and forced displacement is often said to be very much focussed on (national) elite actors such as politicians or governments, rather than including many international voices, or even those of migrants and refugees as individuals. This may be due to the fact that migration and forced displacement are heavily politicized policy domains in many countries and subject to competitive party politics.

Intergovernmental agencies and organizations such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) are important stakeholders in the field of international policies. International non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), CARE, Save the Children, and the International Rescue Committee, as well as local non-governmental organizations like National Red Cross and Red Crescent Committees, do play a considerable role in implementing policies on migration and forced displacement in national contexts as well, and provide support to migrants and refugees in numerous ways.

While news media outlets decisively impact the public image of migration and forced displacement, studies on the journalistic actors within the field, as well as their networks with other stakeholders, are still rather scarce. Pointing towards the complex connections in the field, journalists report a certain dependency on the support of intergovernmental or non-governmental organizations, as these often serve as door-openers providing contact to migrants and refugees.

At the same time, an international “migration industry” that is increasingly commercialized has emerged, including specialized agencies for labour immigration, multinational companies carrying out border security tasks, and illegal businesses such as smuggling and human trafficking by organized criminal networks. 

Various phases of migration triggered mass communication scholars to study the contents of media coverage about the topic. A variety of content analyses have been conducted to find out how journalists report about migrants and refugees. Of course, the results are highly dependent on the respective national and historic contexts of migration flows and debates. For example, there is evidence that leading African newspapers report much less about migration than their European counterparts, even though many African countries are both countries of origin and destination for migrants and refugees. Yet, even within Europe the degree of attention to, as well as the framing of the issue, varies significantly, as a recent comparative study by the European Journalism Observatory (EJO) and Otto Brenner Stiftung has shown. The study reveals differences in the quantity and quality of coverage not only between Western and Central Eastern Europe, but also within Western Europe. Also, research has shown that different communities of migrants are depicted differently by the same media. Within the European Union (EU), for example, news media may depict migration from outside the EU more negatively and with a focus on security, as suggested by a recent study in seven EU countries.

In recent studies in the context of the so-called European “refugee crisis”, it has often been diagnosed that the media focus on elitist actors rather than giving voice to migrants and refugees themselves. Elitist actors may include national and international politicians, state authorities and international actors such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). By contrast, several studies have diagnosed that migrants and refugees are depicted as anonymous groups rather than as individuals with agency. Moreover, there seems to be a tendency for media coverage of the issue to be dominated by day-to-day politics and particular moments of crisis, rather than by a constant monitoring and providing of the relevant background information audiences need to assess issues pertaining to migrants and refugees. As a general tendency, it seems that political debates and political actors are rather overrepresented in the media coverage of migration and forced displacement. This may come at the expense of coverage of relevant economic, cultural, or historical background factors. Content analyses also suggest that journalists rarely differentiate between the different terminologies concerning migrants and refugees. Refugees with their respective rights under the Geneva Convention seem to be confounded with other migrants. In a 2015 report, the Ethical Journalism Network recommended the news media appoint specialist reporters focussing on migration to improve the quality of coverage.

Journalists may influence the perception of and attitudes towards migrants and refugees, be it in the countries of origin, transit, or destination. Even if the media do not or only rarely report about migration and forced displacement, this might have an impact on audiences and decision-makers. A striking example is the picture of the drowned refugee boy Alan Shenu, often referred to as “Aylan Kurdi”, in news coverage. His image made the headlines worldwide in September 2015. A 2018 research paper demonstrated that the image of Alan Shenu had contextual effects on the political preferences of news audiences. While the picture initially reinforced support for liberal refugee policies across political lines, over time it was, however, instrumentalized by opponents of such policies. Another study concluded that the iconic image impacted audiences much more than statistics about hundreds of thousands of deaths. People largely unaffected by the rising death toll in Syria suddenly showed much more interest in the fate of refugees after seeing the picture.

Research has shown that increased media coverage of migration influences the knowledge and perceived importance of the topic among the public. While some studies conclude that increased media attention towards migration and forced displacement (also termed media salience) has rather negative effects on the perception of the issue in the eyes of the public, others have found evidence for positive effects, such as the fostering of more positive attitudes towards migrants and refugees. Still others have found only limited effects, such as a recent examination of how news framing influences people’s attitudes towards free movement within the European Union. Yet, effects may vary considerably according to the news genres studied, consumption patterns on the part of the audience, or countries studied. In general, studies have pointed out that media coverage typically focuses on only a few aspects of migration and groups of migrants, such as undocumented immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees, whereas labour immigration, for example, receives much less attention. In this way, the media shape the public images of migration issues, emphasizing some while neglecting others. Also, a focus on negativity within media coverage about the topic has been detected; immigration frequently seems to be framed as a cultural, criminal or economic threat. Several studies point to a connection of migration coverage to security concerns, such as terrorism. Such a framing may in turn be reproduced in attitudes towards and opinions about migration. However, claims of direct effects of the frequency and tone of media coverage on people’s opinions or behaviour usually remain contested. Measuring immediate effects of news media coverage is difficult, and it is hard to establish causal links between media coverage and, for example, voter turnout for anti-migrant parties. Besides the mass media, many other factors may influence how people see the world.