MIND, BRAIN, AND EDUCATION
The Role of the Mass Media
in the Integration of Migrants
Vanessa Christoph1
ABSTRACT—The media have a profound effect on the
worldview of their consumers and should be carefully
considered in matters of immigration. Often, migrants are
portrayed through a negative lens by the media and most
usually as a homogenous group rather than as individuals. This
article examines the portrayal of migrants in one particular
context (Germany) and questions what the best ways would
be for handling these negative images, especially but not only
in education systems. The author concludes that perhaps the
combination of viewing migrants as individual people, rather
than as a homogenous group, as well as more positive media
portrayal of migrant people, would lead to a more positive
representation of migrants in society.
Studies have shown that migrants are often portrayed in a
negative manner in the mass media, usually referring to them
as members of an ethnic group rather than as individuals,
leading to the creation of a negative image of the entire group
in the host society. This article examines how the mass media
can contribute to the creation, enhancement, or reduction of
positive or negative attitudes between migrants and the host
society and what role the mass media play in the integration (or
not) of migrants and ethnic minorities in Western societies, as
an example particularly in Germany. Furthermore, the article
discusses to what extent the individualization of migrants
could be useful to make (optimal) social integration possible.
Does the host society need to stop considering migrants as an
indivisible group, but rather as individuals, to allay the effects
of the concept ‘‘we and the others’’ (Todorov, 1989) and to end
the homogenization of the ‘‘out-group’’? And may be migrants
would need to (be able to) identify themselves (better) with
the host society, which in itself is certainly hindered by ethnic
segregation? It seems that the individualization of migrants,
1 ZNLTransferCenter for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University,
Germany
Address correspondence to Vanessa Christoph, ZNL TransferCenter for
Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Beim Alten Fritz 2, 89075
Ulm. Germany; e-mail: vanessa.christoph@znl-ulm.de.
© 2012 the Author
Volume 6—Number 2 Journal Compilation © 2012 International Mind, Brain, and Education Society and Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
potentially fostered by education, and the portrayal of a more
positive image in the media can improve the integration of
migrants in their host society.
CRITICISM OF JOURNALISTIC PRACTICES
In his book Sur la télévision [On Television], Bourdieu (1996)
extensively criticizes institutionalized practices of journalism
in general, and televised journalism in particular, which
is generally based on aspects of entertainment, spectacular
images, sensationalism, and so on. One of his main criticisms is
that television channels are so determined by economic factors
that their main concern lies in commercial success, based on
market shares and viewing figures—that is, on what ‘‘sells’’
(this idea is not new; see Lippmann, 1922/2004, Public Opinion).
This priority obviously affects the quality and the selection
of news coverage. To obtain high viewing figures—or at least
higher figures than the competition—new, interesting news
(or rather, what journalists consider to be interesting) need to
be shown every day, preferably accompanied by spectacular
images, to satisfy the viewers’ craving for sensation.
Journalists tend to see everything through the glasses of
their particular field and select subjects to be shown according
to their worldview. It is not what they view as the ‘‘common’’
events that are of interest to them, but rather what they
consider to be extraordinary, spectacular, and voyeuristic,
which is moreover often presented in an exaggerated fashion
(see Früh, 1994), sometimes having an impact on their viewers
that journalists are not necessarily aware of. The extraordinary
is of course also supposed to distinguish their channel from
the competition and thus lead to higher viewing figures
(Bourdieu, 1996). Furthermore, most of the time there is
little or no time to discuss, analyze, or interpret events in
detail, to explain them in depth to the viewers and make them
understandable, and so it has to be assumed that the viewers
understand what is being said, the way it is meant—which
is certainly not always the case (Bourdieu, 1996). Moreover,
television quickly jumps from one subject to the next and
thus viewers have no time to process and reflect about what
they have seen—they become ‘‘fast thinkers’’ (Bourdieu, 1996),
97
 Role of the Mass Media in the Integration of Migrants
who only have at best a superficial perception of current
events. Lippmann already came to the conclusion in 1922
that reading requires more independent thought and memory
capacity, to be able to obtain a comprehensive understanding
of an event. With ‘‘pictures,’’ however, ‘‘the whole process
of observing, describing, reporting, and then imagining, has
been accomplished for you’’ (Lippmann, 1922/2004, p. 50)
and therefore no longer necessitates an independent thought
process. The values of the news channels also influence the
free thought and work processes of journalists, who constantly
need to chase the next scoop and thus have no time for in-
depth research and reporting (see Champagne, 1993/2004).
Another problem lies in the fact that journalists obtain most
of their information from other journalists. This creates a
circular dissemination process through which information
nourishes itself and is simply reused without further research
or verification to substantiate the subject. As a consequence,
all channels (and also newspapers, given the huge influence of
television’s practices on those of the written press) choose the
same subjects and report on them in a similar way (Bourdieu,
1996). By reporting on certain events and supporting them
with images (or by only reporting on subjects when images are
available; Früh, 1994), television produces an ‘‘effet de réel,’’
an illusion of reality, which leads the viewers to believe what
they see, giving enormous power to the visual media (Bourdieu,
1996; see Champagne, 2004). Television portrays society from
its point of view (see Chomsky, 1989/2004), and that influences
the way society perceives itself, transforming itself to fit this
image (Champagne, 2004). Owing to their agenda-setting
function, the media decide what will be shown about societal
and political events, and what the viewers are informed about
(Bourdieu, 1996). As the media are often the only source of
information people use, especially for such subject matters,
they very much influence society’s representation of reality
(Früh, 1994; see Bourdieu, 1996). Therefore, television has
an especially strong influence on an enormous part of the
population (Bourdieu, 1996). This is particularly true for
people from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds, who
do not necessarily read daily newspapers or own a computer
with Internet access, where they could potentially obtain more
differentiated and/or more detailed information.
In ‘‘La misère du monde’’ [‘‘The Weight of the World’’],
Bourdieu (1993/2004) analyzes socioeconomic and sociocul-
tural problems of migrants and ethnic minorities in France,
which are partly created by society. He connects these prob-
lems, among other things, with the (in-)visibility of minorities
in the media and the way in which they are portrayed therein.
Especially in his article ‘‘La vision médiatique’’ [‘‘The View
from the Media’’], Champagne (2004) discusses in depth how
social problems only become visible once journalists acknowl-
edge them as ‘‘newsworthy’’ and the media report about
them, and how the journalistic field deforms events for its
purposes (p. 95). A dramatic consequence of this practice is
98
that (wrong) impressions that recipients receive about certain
subjects stay anchored in their memory, even if the informa-
tion is corrected or denied later on, as this even supports
spontaneous opinion making (Champagne, 2004). As there is
nothing extraordinary about the everyday lives of migrants
or marginal groups (as for anybody else), hardly anything
is reported abut them at all. However, when reports are
shown about them, these groups (usually) have no influence
whatsoever on the coverage (Champagne, 2004). As noted,
however, because journalists are usually only interested in
‘‘spectacular’’ events, their viewers only get to see the nega-
tive, violent, and dangerous image of these social groups that
only rarely get a word in edgeways. When they finally do get
their say, they unfortunately mostly just say what the jour-
nalists want to hear (Champagne, 2004)—or anything else is
simply not broadcast. Sometimes journalists, in the sense of
self-fulfilling prophecies, can even provoke actions through
their simple presence, just because people want to be shown
on TV (Champagne, 2004). Furthermore, trivial events are
often presented as social issues (Bourdieu, 1996), where, for
instance, personal vengeance is transformed into a racial hate
crime (Champagne, 2004; see Haenni Hoti, 2005; see footnote
6, below). The constant negative presentation of certain res-
idential areas and social groups leads to the stigmatization
of members of these groups, making their lives difficult, for
instance, on the job market (Champagne, 2004). When they
themselves feel well integrated, it is difficult for them to accept
their ‘‘objective non-integration’’ (Champagne, 2004). How-
ever, if they were to return to their countries of origin, where
they may not have even been born and raised, they would feel
just as foreign and badly (re-)integrated there as in their host
country.
THE ROLE OF THE MASS MEDIA IN THE INTEGRATION
OF MIGRANTS AND ETHNIC MINORITIES
There seems to be a general consensus that the mass media play
a role in the integration of migrants and ethnic minorities into
host societies—for members of the majority society through
the presentation of migrants in the media and for migrants
through the use of mainstream and/or ethnomedia.
The Pictures in Our Heads
What we know about our society and the world in which
we live, we know through the mass media. (Luhmann,
1995/2004, p. 9; author’s translation)
In his book Public Opinion, first published in 1922, Lippmann
explained that the media (in his time of course principally the
print media) create ‘‘pictures in our heads’’ that differ from
the world outside. Often, the only experience one has with a
Volume 6—Number 2
 Vanessa Christoph
certain issue, area of public life, or social group is the mental
image that one creates about them—largely conveyed through
the media (1922/2004). This restricted experience is also due
to the complexity of the society that nobody can experi-
ence firsthand in its entirety (Weber-Menges, 2005). Between
the people and their environment a ‘‘pseudo-environment’’ is
therefore created, an ‘‘inner representation of the world’’ to
which the person reacts as if it were his/her ‘‘real’’ environment
(Lippmann, 1922/2004). Lippmann also reminds us that ‘‘in a
series of events seen mostly through stereotypes, we readily
accept sequence or parallelism as equivalent to cause and
effect’’ (p. 85).
To (better) orient ourselves to our world, we categorize
what we see. This leads to the development of stereotypes,
which serve to define the identity of one’s society in contrast to
another’s—in-group versus out-group—or to be able to define
one’s individual place in society and thus to differentiate one-
self from ‘‘the others’’ (see Six & Schütz, 1996). Stereotypes
strengthen the image of ‘‘us and the others,’’ and according
to Luhmann (1995/2004), they are also developed and formed
through the mass media1 (see Bourdieu, 1996). For Hunting-
ton (1996/2002), the differentiation of ‘‘intracivilizational us
and extracivilizational them’’ is a necessary, natural human
phenomenon, as the development of a (national, ethnic, cul-
tural, etc.) identity creates a feeling of belonging, which helps
distinguish friends from foes—as without true enemies there
can be no true friends. Stereotypes are also coined through
the (more or less pronounced) ethnocentric views of societies
and are therefore defined culturally2 (Lippmann, 1922/2004).
When internalized stereotypes are shaken, however, this may
endanger the basis of ‘‘our’’ universe, which we unwillingly
admit is also not ‘‘the’’ universe per se (Luhmann, 1995/2004).
Stereotypes are strengthened when what we see corre-
sponds to our internalized stereotypes; if this is not the case,
one can either presume that it is an exception that confirms
the rule, or the stereotype is adjusted to the new information
and modified consequently (Luhmann, 1995/2004). Accord-
ing to Früh (1994), the individual reaction in such situations
depends on the level of ambiguity (in-)tolerance, which can
either lead somebody to hold on to previously forged opinions
very strongly and to barely integrate inconsistent information
or to rather easily change his approach toward specific issues.
Do the Mass Media Distort or Construct Reality?
According to Luhmann (1995/2004), one should not ask
how the mass media distort reality through their portrayals,
but rather how they construct reality. Früh (1994) considers
that ‘‘reality’’—which philosophically speaking is of course
perceived and represented by each individual in his/her own
subjective way—is first transformed into ‘‘media reality’’
by journalists, which is then—when already altered or
manipulated—transformed into the ‘‘viewer’s reality,’’ where it
Volume 6—Number 2
is perceived differently by each viewer and undergoes another
subjective interpretation and deformation. However, when
preparing their news coverage, journalists need to presume
that viewers will receive the information (largely) the way
the journalists mean it and do not overtly misinterpret it
(Früh, 1994). The ‘‘reality’’ created through this process is
therefore not (necessarily) perceived in a consensual manner
(Luhmann, 1995/2004).
To remain attractive to their viewers, the media constantly
need to supply news that seems surprising, new, ‘‘interesting’’
(again, in their eyes), and thus newsworthy (see Bourdieu,
1996). However, Luhmann (1995/2004), among others, believes
it to be implausible that such events occur daily and the
daily presentation of such news even proves the swindle,
which the media are guilty of. Moreover, the media have to
make a selective choice about what should be covered, which
means that many events are not covered at all, because of
lack of space and/or time or because the editors presume it
is not (or, say, less) interesting to their viewers or rather
that it should not be interesting to them (see Bourdieu, 1996;
Chomsky, 1989/2004). Reality is thus ‘‘selectively constructed’’
(Luhmann, 1995/2004, p. 82): the media decide what society is
informed about and what it is to discuss (see Bourdieu, 1996;
Chomsky, 1989/2004). However, as they simply make their
audience aware of current issues, they rather influence how a
certain issue is presented and what people think about, than
what they are actually thinking (see Bourdieu, 1996; Fleras, 2006;
Weber-Menges, 2005; Yildiz, 2006).
Media reality is therefore colored by the ‘‘stereotypes and
prejudices of journalists, their professional rules and political
opinions, the constraints of news production and the neces-
sities of media presentation’’ (Weber-Menges, 2005, p. 133;
author’s translation)—largely in the sense of ‘‘only bad news
is good news.’’ For Bourdieu (1996), journalists’ personal opin-
ions or political orientations only play a minor role in the way
they present news and, in any event, influence their choices
much less than they (along with most other people) tend to
believe. Furthermore, scary and exaggerated headlines alone
can contribute to viewers getting a negative image of migrants
and foreigners (Farrokhzad, 2006; Geißler, 1999). According
to the Thomas theorem, recipients act according to what they
believe to be reality, with little consideration of whether their
perceived reality matches the ‘‘true’’ reality (Geißler, 1999).3
The Presentation of Ethnic Minorities and Migrants
in the Mass Media of Host Societies
Several studies have shown that foreigners are, if at all, mostly
shown in a negatively biased manner in the German mass
media (see Butterwegge, 2006; Geißler & Pöttker, 2005a,
2006a; Schatz, Holtz-Bacha, & Nieland, 2000), as is the
case in other countries. Even though the German media
also report on German criminals, this does not lead to ‘‘the
99
 Role of the Mass Media in the Integration of Migrants
Germans’’ to be seen as a threat, in part because Germans
are also portrayed in many other (positive) ways, whereas
foreigners are shown almost exclusively as criminals (Sonntag-
Wolgast, 2000). For Müller (2005), this negative portrayal
of migrants leads to a refusal of integration by the host
society and to an inhibition of integration by minorities (see
Pöttker, 2005a). This encourages minorities to create and
more widely use ethnomedia,4 which, in turn, present the
German society in a negatively biased manner. This often
further inhibits integration and finally contributes to the
creation of ‘‘media ghettos’’ or ‘‘parallel societies.’’ To try to
avoid these and other consequences of media reports, the
German Press Council (Deutscher Presserat) has formulated
several ‘‘Journalistic Principles (press codex).’’ These include
articles on discrimination5 that are, however, not (always)
adhered to by journalists (especially in the local and regional
press, to say nothing of tabloids), and violations are only rarely
sanctioned (Pöttker, 2005a). According to Jäger (2000), if it
is not absolutely essential for the case, not mentioning the
origin of a criminal (under specification of nationality, skin
color, German language capacities, or photos) could avoid the
development of a negative image of migrants; this is, by the way,
also valid for their (stereotypical) portrayal in entertainment
programs, and so on.
Müller (2005; see Geißler, 1999) has established an overview
of some quantitative studies on German newspaper reports
about foreigners between 1960 and 1999 and comes to the
following result concerning their typical portrayal (similar
results are likely in other countries): (1) generally, little is
reported about foreigners, and (2) if anything is reported,
it is mostly negative. The origin of foreign criminals is
usually stressed (even if they possess a passport of the host
country), whereas ‘‘German’’ criminals are usually presented
in an anonymous form and their nationality is not mentioned
at all (see Jäger, 2000). Moreover, ‘‘German’’ suspects are
more frequently exculpated of the responsibility for their
actions than foreigners, whereby the latter rather appear
as a general threat. Furthermore, ‘‘German’’ criminals are
more likely to have the opportunity to explain themselves
publicly, which is usually denied to foreigners (Jäger, 2000).
As elsewhere, foreigners are also often presented as financial
burdens, who ‘‘undeservingly’’ claim social security benefits
and get away with tax fraud (see Erdem, 2002). Supposedly,
they even threaten the nation’s culture and way of life.
Alongside the negative portrayals, positive ones, which would
offer a balance, are most obviously missing. (3) Foreigners
sometimes appear in goodwill-reports, in which they are
presented positively in the framework of a ‘‘demonstrative
journalistic special effort,’’ even if they do not get the
opportunity to express themselves. This possibility was
given to some by Bourdieu (1993/2004) in ‘‘The Weight
of the World.’’ (4) Different status groups are presented
differently: asylum seekers particularly negatively, employees
100
less negatively, and professional athletes or celebrities rather
positively (see Merten, 1987). (5) National or regional origin
plays an important role, with migrants from the Third World,
Turkey, or the Balkans being presented especially negatively
(Merten, 1987). (6) A regionally high proportion of foreigners
increases negative reports. (7) Reports are generally related to
current events.
Ruhrmann and Demren (2000) mention some more studies
on media reports, which show that (1) in certain circum-
stances, ethnic minorities are proportionally overrepresented
in the media, compared with their proportion of the popula-
tion, leading the public to think that there are many more for-
eigners in the country than is actually the case. (2) Exaggerated
portrayals of particularly exotic and foreign-looking cultures
and persons increase an impression of foreignness and appear
threatening; the current coverage of events leads to the neglect
of background explanations and has a negative influence on
integration. According to Ruhrmann, Sommer, and Uhlemann
(2006), reports about migrants are moreover approximately 7 s
longer than other news and are announced more often before-
hand. Furthermore, especially since 9/11, there are more reports
about terrorism than about any other migration-relevant sub-
ject. Muslims are often presented as (and/or conflated with)
Islamists/fundamentalists and accordingly associated with
terrorism (Ruhrmann et al., 2006). Jäger (2000) also adds that
foreigners are often associated with gang crime, whereas Ger-
mans are rather presented as individual perpetrators—these
last points also have foreign and domestic policy aspects. The
expression ‘‘crimes committed by foreigners’’ is also mislead-
ing, as it leads to the assumption that crimes committed by
foreigners are necessarily committed by them because they are
foreigners and not because they are simply criminals (Jäger,
2000)6 —that may be the case for violations of asylum or alien
legislation, which by definition can only be committed by for-
eigners (Ruhrmann & Demren, 2000; see Haenni Hoti, 2005).
Generally, it can be said that the media contribute to the
process of ethnicization through their portrayal of migrants,
by presenting a biased ‘‘normality’’ that ‘‘translates social
inequality into foreignness’’ (Terkessidis, 2000, p. 93; author’s
translation) and transforms socioeconomic problems into
ethnical ones (see Bourdieu, 1996; Champagne, 2004). For
Geißler (1999), ‘‘the distorted image in the media is an
indication of the failed integration of ethnic minorities into
the [. . .] public, which constitutes an important aspect of
the general integration of ethnic minorities into [. . .] society’’
(p. 35; author’s translation).
Ethnomedia
Migrants use ethnomedia for various reasons and with
different consequences.7 Many ethnic minorities have the
feeling that their interests and needs are not sufficiently
or adequately addressed in the German press. Furthermore,
Volume 6—Number 2
 Vanessa Christoph
first-generation migrants are often confronted with a language
problem and thus (at least in the beginning) inform themselves
about current events through press in their mother tongue
(Halm, 2006).8
Moreover, ethnomedia serve to maintain a connection to
the country of origin. The Internet is now very important
in that sense, especially for adolescents, and can also hinder
integration if the online community is strongly shaped through
common living conditions and ethnic and cultural roots
that are to be maintained (Schneider & Arnold, 2006).
Bonfadelli (2007) stresses that ‘‘when Turkish adolescents
choose an integration strategy out of social aspects, this
results in a dominant use of the German media’’ (p. 14;
author’s translation). On the other hand, an exclusive use
of ethnomedia9 can create a ‘‘media ghettoization’’ or ‘‘media
segregation,’’ where only priorities and perspectives of the
country of origin are presented on certain subjects, which
certainly does not foster integration. Nor does this support or
encourage German language acquisition (Halm, 2006). Even
though ethnomedia exist, neither they nor the mainstream
media concretely represent the needs of migrants; this makes
more specific offers for migrants by migrants necessary, which
would be more successful and could certainly contribute
better to integration (Halm, 2006; see Geißler’s concept of
intercultural media below).
Young second- or third-generation Turks in Germany also
use ethnomedia to develop a group identity if they are largely
dissatisfied with their personal circumstances (Schneider &
Arnold, 2006). Content analyses, however, show that these
Turkish ethnomedia have a segregative rather than integrative
influence, as they report negatively, if at all, about Germany
and the Germans. Geißler and Pöttker (2005b) therefore come
to the hypothesis that ethnomedia hinder integration even
more than the negative portrayal of Turks in the German
media.
In spite of all this, Weber-Menges (2006) believes that
ethnomedia contribute to the development of identity, a
‘‘condition for the capacity and willingness of integration into
the country of immigration,’’ and can thus possibly increase the
acceptance of the German culture (p. 141; author’s translation).
In the United States, ethnomedia already started to emerge
in the nineteenth century, with the goal to help immigrants
adapt to their new environment and culture, and also for
them to maintain their ethnic roots (Starck, 2006); this early
development may be seen as reflecting the crucial differences
between American and European conceptions of integration,
a phenomenon to be perceived also in the different views of
‘‘intercultural and/or multicultural education in Europe and in
the US’’ (see Tarozzi, 2012). In the Netherlands, news channels
were obligated in 2002 to devote 20% of their TV broadcasting
time and 25% of their radio airtime to multicultural subjects,
to provide ethnic minorities with national programs that they
would otherwise seek through programs from their countries
Volume 6—Number 2
of origin. Ethnically, marginal groups are since actually treated
as target audiences, like the rest of the Dutch population
(d’Haenens & Koeman, 2006). In sum, one can say that for a
particular ethnic group, ‘‘the higher the socioeconomic status,
the longer the stay in the host country and the better the
language capacities, the higher the use of the majority media’’
(Piga, 2007, p. 223; author’s translation)—and the lower the
migrant crime rate (Haenni Hoti, 2005).
The Role of the Mass Media for Integration
Following Durkheim (1893/1997), Pöttker assumes that
‘‘having precise and up-to-date information about one another’’
is necessary for social integration—Durkheim referred to the
division of labor, Pöttker (2005b) to social groups. In this
sense, there should be a ‘‘journalistic duty to report in a
comprehensive and generally understandable manner about all parts
and members of society’’ (p. 35; original emphasis, author’s
translation). This is, however, largely avoided by the fact
that social minorities rarely get the opportunity to express
themselves in the media, to present their point of view, and to
coinfluence public opinion (see Champagne, 2004). Moreover,
the focus usually lies on what problems they create for the
majority, instead of reporting about the problems they may face
themselves (e.g., discrimination; Farrokhzad, 2006). Fleras
(2006) describes how individuals, whose cultural or ethnic
group is presented positively in the media, develop a stronger
self-esteem and feeling of belonging, while portrayals that go
against their worries and needs lead to a feeling of rejection
or hostility. As Bourdieu (1996) said, journalists function
according to systemic and institutional practices. According
to Fleras, it is in the nature of the mass media to disseminate
a constant, deprecatory image of migrants and minorities.
Chomsky (1989/2004) explains this through the fact that
the media serve ‘‘societal purposes,’’ which for their part are
supposed to anchor a strong feeling of belonging—and thus
loyalty—toward their government10 in the mind of society.
The few studies that have been conducted on this subject
show that the media influence prejudices, feelings, and
behaviors toward ethnic minorities (Geißler & Pöttker,
2005b).11 Some studies have shown that the media are
largely described as very influential by consumers, including
as far as the development of xenophobia is concerned. The
influence of the mass media, however, not only depends on the
images they portray but also on the individual characteristics
of the consumers, such as personal factors (origin, formal
education, capacity for criticism, influenceability, ambiguity
(in)tolerance, etc.), preexisting attitudes toward ethnic
minorities that are shaped through socialization and social
context (peer groups; Weber-Menges, 2005, p. 146), or
preexisting knowledge of a certain subject (Früh, 1994). Esser
(2000), however, assumes that the media have hardly any
influence on the attitudes of those consumers who already
101
 Role of the Mass Media in the Integration of Migrants
have a fixed opinion through socialization, peer groups, and
so on, as these are already anchored in the cognitive system
beforehand. If they do not yet have a fixed opinion though, it
could be forged and shaped through the media—however, the
existing opinion that has been shaped beforehand also has to
originate from somewhere.
WHAT MEASURES COULD THE MEDIA TAKE
TO CONTRIBUTE TO BETTER INTEGRATION?
In the various publications on the subject, several recom-
mendations are made that could be implemented in media
companies to possibly contribute to a more positive presen-
tation of minorities and thus to their better integration. One
of the recommendations mentioned most frequently is what
Geißler (2005) calls the proportional representation of eth-
nic diversity, that is, a stronger representation of members
of minority groups as journalists, news presenters, modera-
tors, or editors, who emanate diversity to the outside and
contribute additional and different perspectives to news cov-
erage (see Ruhrmann & Demren, 2000); this has already been
more or less successfully implemented in Canada, the United
Kingdom, and the United States (Starck, 2006). Discriminat-
ing portrayals and stereotyping would need to be avoided
and reports would need to show migrants in a positive light,
instead of an exclusively negative one; (more) background
reports and positive presentations of successful integration
(see Schimank, 2000) and collaboration between nationals
and foreigners could also be useful (see Ruhrmann & Demren,
2000; Weber-Menges, 2005). Moreover, the economic and
demographic necessity of migrants would need to be stressed
more frequently. Another factor would be better instruction
and continuing training of journalists, where they would learn
to improve and intensify their research methods, and to con-
cern themselves more in depth with the subject of migration, to
be able to report in a more balanced manner (Müller, 2005). In
the United States, associations, institutes, and organizations
have been created since the 1970s to train journalists ‘‘to pro-
mote media diversity,’’ to improve the presentation of ethnic
minorities in the media, and to portray them in a fairer and
more accurate way (Starck, 2006). Minorities should also be
recognized as (potential) audiences and the coverage of events
should accordingly also be directed to them (Müller, 2005).
This could, for instance, be enhanced by bicultural or bilingual
TV channels or programs (Ruhrmann & Demren, 2000).
Geißler and Pöttker (2006b) have presented a model
of intercultural integration through the media, in which
intercultural communication is, ideally, made possible by
members of the majority and a proportionally representative
part of minorities working closely together in the produc-
tion process; this way, it might be possible to include
specific ethnic knowledge and information in the media.
102
Collaboration in content construction could furthermore cre-
ate an active acceptance through necessary information on
majorities and minorities from both sides and better inform
minorities about social and political events in their host
country.
However, solely modifying the media is certainly not
sufficient. Hence, outside the media environment, it would
also be useful to change migration policies in such a way
that they would diminish fears and defensive reactions. Here,
education has a major role to play, to say the least. It should
be made clear to students that it is not the foreigners as
such who affect the harmonious living-together but rather
racism. In this sense, people, who are generally influenced very
early on by the media and certain political parties, would
be immunized against racist resentment and stereotypes
from a young age (Butterwegge, 2006; Grosser, 1987), for
example, through direct intense contact with other ethnic
groups (Six & Schütz, 1996), for instance, in formal education
settings from preschool onwards. They also need to learn
media competences early enough through media education
to be able to critically question media content (Butterwegge,
2006). Education systems are in a unique position to take
on this responsibility, by implementing measures that will
ultimately prove efficient (see Deutscher Bundestag, 2011).
Finally, multiculturality would need to be accepted as a natural
fact (Farrokhzad, 2006). Therefore, ‘‘the media are called upon
to accompany the change to a multicultural society and thus to
open new forms of identity formation and integration’’ (Schatz
& Nieland, 2000, p. 19; author’s translation).
INTEGRATION THROUGH INDIVIDUALIZATION?
As noted, in the media, crimes committed by members of
ethnic minorities are usually ascribed to their ethnic origin, for
which the whole community needs to take responsibility (see,
e.g., Butterwegge, 2006; Fleras, 2006; Haenni Hoti, 2005), as
‘‘the foreigners’’ are constantly seen as an indivisible group.
One possibility for migrants and other minorities to break
this classification and to be seen as self-contained individuals
would be to break out of their ‘‘ghettos’’ and to more equitably
disperse socially12 and geographically—admittedly, this is
probably easier said than done. Moreover, the social contact
between host society and migrants beginning in schools (and
preschools), is essential for their integration. This, however,
can only be achieved if minorities do not exclusively stick to
themselves (d’Haenens & Koeman, 2006), that is, when the
restricted perceptions of concrete in- and out-groups—of ‘‘we
and the others’’—is dissolved, as it categorically splits behavior
and actions into a positive behavior of and toward the in-group
and a negative behavior of and toward the out-group.
For d’Haenens and Koeman (2006), diversity and equality
are integral parts of integration. In the 1990s, in the
Volume 6—Number 2
 Vanessa Christoph
Netherlands, emphasis was accordingly placed on similarities
instead of differences between immigrants and members of
their host society to create a united society (d’Haenens &
Koeman, 2006). In 2004, the Blok Committee (Parliamentary
Inquiry on Integration Policy), however, suggested the
following conditions for successful integration, which for
d’Haenens and Koeman go more in the direction of assimilation
than multiculturalism, as now ‘‘government measures are
aimed at equipping immigrants with the knowledge and skills
that will promote their independence and self-sufficiency’’
(p. 229)—a perspective that seems to have spread to a number
of countries in the past years:
(1) Knowledge of language such as to enable participation
in society; (2) everyone must respect the values and norms
established in the law; (3) in the private domain, there is room
for differentiation and one’s own interpretation within the
framework of the law; (4) newcomers must be acquainted with
the unwritten rules that make functioning in society easier;
and (5) newcomers are expected to be willing to integrate and
Dutch society must make this integration possible (d’Haenen
& Koeman, 2006).
These suggestions do not sound unreasonable, if one con-
siders that a minimal degree of assimilation is necessary to
successfully settle and integrate into a foreign country, not
only to feel less foreign oneself. However, assimilation should
not necessarily go so far as to someone ‘‘being preferably com-
pletely absorbed into the host society’’ (Moser, 2007, p. 351;
author’s translation), leading to any cultural, religious, and
ethnical identity being given up. A pluralization of lifestyles
is, after all, given in both majority and minority groups nowa-
days in Germany (as in most other countries), which ‘‘allow
a number of options for self-definition in the area of tension
of cultural influences’’ (Moser, 2007, p. 351f; author’s transla-
tion), and thus renders multiculturalism possible (or should
render it possible), to enable different ethnic groups to live
together. Becker (2000), like Geißler (2005), presumes that the
integration of an ethnic group into a host society needs to be
preceded by a phase of self-discovery, that is, the development
of an anchored ethnic identity that is necessary to develop a
feeling of self-esteem, enabling people ‘‘to open up towards
others, to respect them and to communicate and interact with
them on an equal level’’ (Geißler, 2005, p. 58; author’s transla-
tion). Once this is done, the process of individualization can
begin more efficiently (Geißler, 2005).
For Germany, Geißler (2005) suggests a ‘‘humane
compromise between assimilation and segregation,’’ which he
calls ‘‘intercultural integration’’ largely based on the Canadian
model of multiculturalism, with its civic rights, equality,
and social and structural integration for all.13 Thereby, he
particularly wants to refute Esser’s (2000) assimilation theory,
according to which integration is only possibly in the form
of assimilation, which in turn is only achievable through
individualization.
Volume 6—Number 2
HOW COULD EDUCATION SYSTEMS FOSTER
MULTICULTURAL COHESION AND IMPROVE
THE INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS?
If we consider it a necessity to teach every member of our
societies, starting with our youngest, that multiculturalism
is an enrichment for each and every one of us, and can even
have a positive effect on the society, education systems need
to play an important role in fostering multicultural cohesion
and integration. There are several ways in which this could be
achieved.
A good starting point would certainly be to mix children
of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds in kindergarten
and school from a very young age. This way, they would
be confronted with each other early on and would learn
(i.e., would be more likely to ‘‘feel’’) that it is natural to
live together and get along with each other, even if they do
acknowledge differences. Even though very young infants seem
to have a preference for hearing their mother tongue and being
confronted with people of their own ethnicity, their brain’s
plasticity allows this predisposition to change, and it would
seem that this is enhanced through early exposure to people
from diverse ethnicities and backgrounds (Hinton, 2012). In
general, babies seem to have an innate capacity for empathy
(Hinton, 2012), which leads them to naturally support others
who are being treated unjustly or who need help, regardless
of their social, ethnic, or cultural background. Apart from the
necessity to communicate with each other in the globalized
world we live in, learning foreign languages (and, whenever
possible, traveling abroad) and meeting people from other
cultural backgrounds certainly also opens people to other
cultures and should therefore be fostered by the education
system (della Chiesa, 2012).
As Becker (2000) and Geißler (2005) believe that
integration needs to be preceded by the development of a
cultural and ethnic identity, which certainly coincides with
the formal acquisition of one’s mother tongue, it may also be
necessary to give migrant children the opportunity to learn
their mother tongue and about their culture and religion at
school, giving them the feeling that their language, culture,
and ethnicity are valued by the education system and thus by
the host society.
Another important aspect would be to foster media lit-
eracy education in children (and adults) to enable anybody
to view and analyze media outputs critically and to enable
media consumers to go out and search for more information on
specific subjects they are particularly interested in or do not
feel well enough informed about, for example, on the Internet.
Measures in this sense have recently been suggested by the
Deutscher Bundestag (2011), for whom it should be a goal that
everybody learn to question media content, to assess sources
and the intentions of specific newspapers and broadcasting
103
 Role of the Mass Media in the Integration of Migrants
channels, and to judge the value and reliability of the presented
information.
CONCLUSION
Geißler (1999) sees several problematical consequences in
the fact that all difficulties between the German majority
and ethnic minorities are viewed undifferentiatedly through
the ‘‘German-Foreigner-Scope’’: (1) the exclusion of foreigners
due to ethnocentrism, (2) the elimination of differentiations
within minority groups (between labor migrants, asylum
seekers, tourists, or students born in Germany), and (3) the
portrayal of crimes committed by labor migrants along the
same lines as those of illegal immigrants and international
criminals, although on the average labor migrants (with similar
social profiles) are just as law-abiding as the average German
(see Haenni Hoti, 2005, for Switzerland). From a political
standpoint, negative (criminal) stereotypes contribute to the
legitimization of restrictive migration policies and explain
(or can even serve as an excuse for) racism (Geißler, 1999).
Therefore, the portrayal of ethnic minorities and migrants in
the mass media is not likely to change in the near future.
Multiculturality in fact already exists in most Western
societies and the integration of those ethnic minorities already
living there is—whether so far successful or not—already
underway and will continue to be necessary for future gen-
erations (through new immigration or births inside the host
country). If one also considers that the knowledge, that is,
the contact between different ethnic peoples, can be useful
and necessary to prevent conflicts, then multiculturalism or
intercultural integration are certainly adequate means, and
this certainly does not necessitate a complete assimilation of
minorities to the majority society. Moreover, multicultural
societies could benefit from ethnic diversity for economic pur-
poses, as is already the case in Canada (Fleras, 2006), and
through which multiculturalism constitutes a positive impact
for the host society through benefits of cultural and intellectual
enrichment that comes from different cultural perspectives.
Individualization—in the sense of the dissociation of mem-
bers from their ethnic community, stereotypical fields of
activity and social class—through more self-determination
is probably necessary to dissolve the image of a homogeneous
out-group, by whom the in-group feels threatened, and it
would certainly contribute to social integration (Schimank,
2000). According to Esser (2000), this individualization would
therefore need to be fostered politically or at least one would
need to stop fostering entire groups and communities per
se. Combined with a modified, (more) positive portrayal of
migrants in the media, and education toward multicultural
cohesion and critical media literacy (see Patriarco, box right),
their social integration could most probably be facilitated and
improved.
104
The Roles of Critical Literacy and Text Selection
Cassandra Patriarco, Harvard Graduate School of Education,
e-mail: cgp669@mail.harvard.edu
Before coming to HGSE, I taught in an under-resourced school in
Washington, DC, which served 100% African American students
who came from some of the most poverty-stricken neighborhoods.
Because race and class issues often overlap, most of my students’
families had to live in public housing or in isolated city wards
(7 & 8), as the city’s demographics were rapidly shifting due
to rapid gentrification. As a result of gentrification, many of my
students had rare opportunities outside of school to interact
with people who spoke different languages and came from
different cultural backgrounds. Inside of school, students were
not afforded opportunities to take language programs and did
not have many opportunities to learn about or experience other
cultures. In schools without non-native language programs and
limited academic/experiential opportunities for learning about
other cultures, what can educators do to promote intercultural
competence among students?
I argue that, by nurturing critical literacy, teachers of all
disciplines can play a key role in supporting students in becoming
critical consumers of information. Implicit to this argument is
the belief that critical literacy is a component skill set that
interculturally competent individuals possess. I also argue that
teachers have a responsibility to expose students to texts that
reflect a variety of perspectives and that provide ‘‘windows’’ into
other cultures.
Critical literacy represents a necessary but insufficient skill set
for intercultural competence. In other words, an individual may
possess strong critical literacy skills and not be interculturally
competent; however, a person cannot attain intercultural
competence without possessing critical literacy skills. Critical
literacy means being able to ask and answer the following
questions about any text: In whose interest is this text? What
purpose does it serve? Who benefits as a result? As an important
side note, a text does not have to be composed of printed
letters/words, it can consist of symbols, images, and/or objects that
hold meaning. For example, a person may apply critical literacy
when encountering a graph in a newspaper or a science/math
class. A critically literate individual would be able to not only
isolate and manipulate the information presented in the graph
but also analyze, evaluate, and critique the graph for its validity,
authenticity, intentionality, and integrity. This means questioning
why the author may have chosen to represent the data in the way
that he/she did and considering its intended and unintended
applications for the real world.
I believe that the questions that critically literate individuals
ask to determine the underlying meaning of texts are similar
to the questions that interculturally competent individuals
must ask themselves to gain cultural self-awareness. For
example, interculturally competent individuals must consider
the following: What are my cultural values, assumptions, and
perceptions? Why do I respond to situations and people in the
ways that I do? How do cultural rules and biases affect my
interactions with others? By learning how to ask questions to dig
beneath the surface meaning of texts, critically literate students
Volume 6—Number 2
 Vanessa Christoph
are being primed to ask and answer the questions about self,
which are essential to intercultural competence. Without being
able to effectively ask and answer questions that challenge the
implicit purposes and assumptions found in texts, I do not see how
it would be possible for students to question one’s own implicit
purposes and assumptions. Self-questioning is an important step
in becoming self-aware and ultimately interculturally competent.
Teachers should consider how to use text selection to support
students in not only becoming self-aware but also gaining
exposure to different cultures. For teachers of monolingual
students, this may mean integrating fictional and informational
texts that were originally written in non-native languages but have
since been translated. Even though these translated texts have
likely lost some of the nuance and implicit meaning inherent to
their original languages, they still grant opportunities for students
to experience diverse cultural values, perspectives, and ideas.
In addition to integrating translated texts by authors from
around the world into the curriculum, teachers can also provide
opportunities for students to read multicultural literature. Rudine
Simms Bishop (1990) introduced the idea that multicultural
literature has a dual role as a mirror and window. The mirror
provides a child with the opportunity to see his/her life reflected
on the pages of a book. The window allows him/her to see into
someone else’s life and understand others’ reality. Rosenblatt
(1995) said, ‘‘Characters and situations in books offer the
opportunity for children to understand what the world may look
like through others’ eyes and offer a chance to further construct
views of themselves and their world.’’
In a globalizing world where information abounds but
opportunities remain limited for low-income students, teachers
can play a critical role in supporting students’ development
of intercultural competence. Teachers can promote students’
intercultural competence through critical literacy and strategic
text selection. Although critical literacy and text selection does
not afford the same ‘‘cultural embeddedness’’ and alterity that
cultural and linguistic immersion would, they still provide
important opportunities for students to move toward greater self-
awareness and understanding of ‘‘others’’’ world views. This is an
important step in one’s journey toward intercultural competence
and ultimately ‘‘supra-cultural habitus’’ in della Chiesa’s (2010)
Tesseract Model.
NOTES
1 See Bourdieu’s related notion of ‘‘symbolic violence,’’ which
he sees as consciously and consistently maintained by the
media.
2 ‘‘For the most part we do not first see, and then define, we
define first and then see. In the great blooming, buzzing
confusion of the outer world we pick out what our culture
has already defined for us, and we tend to perceive that
which we have picked out in the form stereotyped for us
by our culture’’ (Lippmann, 1922/2004, p. 44).
3 For instance, Jäger (2000) and Haenni Hoti (2005)
describe how, through enhanced visibility in the media
(which leads to a growing awareness of existing or
Volume 6—Number 2
perceived problems), public opinion perceives falling
crime rates as growing or becomes afraid that they could
grow further. The growing relevance of terrorism in the
public discussion after 9/11 has had a similar effect, where
the risk of terror attacks is widely feared, although it has
actually gone down (Ruhrmann, Sommer, & Uhlemann,
2006). Of course, this scare mongering also serves politics,
which can thus justify certain policy actions and convince
the public opinion of their legitimacy.
4 Media from migrants’ countries of origin or media
published by migrants in their host country.
5 Article 12.1 stipulates, ‘‘In the news coverage of crimes the
affiliation of suspects or criminals to religious, ethnic or
other minorities shall only be mentioned if it is justifiable
for the understanding of the reported event’’ (see Pöttker,
2005a, p. 185; author’s translation).
6 Extreme examples include the so-called ethnic rivalries,
which often lead to the brink of (and sometimes actually
to) civil wars. Consider what happened in Kyrgyzstan
less than 2 years ago (Ferrando, 2010); it is particularly
interesting in our context that the Western media blindly
replicated the biased representation of some of their
Kyrgyz counterparts, ignorantly presenting a ‘‘standard’’
crime as a violent action ‘‘justified by ethnic hatred’’: an
artificially created ‘‘ethnic rivalry’’ had been fueled by
the media to serve a specific political goal (restoring the
dictatorship of a clan of wrongdoers).
7 Turkish-language media in Germany especially consist of
daily newspapers and TV programs; there are very few
journals and only one radio channel that broadcasts in the
Berlin region (Schneider & Arnold, 2006).
8 The confrontation with local media could, however,
contribute to language acquisition and thus to integration.
9 According to a survey conducted in 2002, only 9% of the
Turks in Germany exclusively use Turkish media; 91% of
the respondents used both German and Turkish media
(Halm, 2006).
10 In Die Zukunft einer Illusion [The Future of an Illusion], Freud
(1927) pointed out that dominated in-groups are more
obedient to their (for them detrimental) society’s social
order that a stigmatized out-group.
11 According to Weber-Menges (2005), it would seem that
there is not yet a generally accepted theory as to how the
media influence public discourse on migrants and their
integration in the sense of societal acceptance, on a societal
level, that is, in the conscience of the masses.
12 As some deprecatory stereotypes about minorities also
result from their low social prestige (Schöneberg, 1987).
13 The expression ‘‘multiculturalism’’ has an all too biased
connotation in Germany to be used there for this
concept—intercultural integration so far is more neutral
(Geißler, 2005).
105
 Role of the Mass Media in the Integration of Migrants
REFERENCES
Becker, J. (2000). Türkisch-deutsche Medienbeziehungen: Phasen
und Systematik. In H. Schatz, C. Holtz-Bacha, & J.-U. Nieland
(Eds.), Migranten und Medien. Neue Herausforderungen an die Integra-
tionsfunktion von Presse und Rundfunk (pp. 106–115). Wiesbaden,
Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Bishop, R. S. (1990). Mirrors, windows and sliding glass doors.
Perspectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom, 6(3), ix–xi.
Bonfadelli, H. (2007). Einleitung. In H. Bonfadelli & H. Moser (Eds.),
Medien und Migration. Europa als multikultureller Raum? (pp. 7–18).
Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
Bourdieu, P. (1996). Sur la télévision. Paris, France: Raisons d’agir. [On
television. New York, NY: The New Press].
Bourdieu, P. (Ed.). (2004 [1993]). La misère du monde. Paris, France:
Seuil. [The weight of the world: Social suffering in contemporary society.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1999].
Butterwegge, C. (2006). Migrationsberichterstattung, Medienpäda-
gogik und politische Bildung. In C. Butterwegge & G. Hentges
(Eds.), Massenmedien, Migration und Integration. Herausforderungen
für Journalismus und politische Bildung (pp. 187–237). Wiesbaden,
Germany: VS Verlag.
Champagne, P. (2004 [1993]). La vision médiatique. In P. Bourdieu
(Ed.), La misère du monde (pp. 72–74). Paris, France: Seuil.
Chomsky, N. (2004 [1989]). Necessary illusions: Thought control in
democratic societies. Boston, MA: South End Press.
d’Haenens, L., & Koeman, J. (2006). From freedom of obligation to
self-sufficiency, 1979–2004: Developments in Dutch integration
and media policy. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Integration
durch Massenmedien. Medien und Migration im internationalen Vergleich
[Mass media:Integration,mediaandmigration:Acomparative perspective],
Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 223–247). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript
Verlag.
della Chiesa, B. (2010). Wanted: Tesseract. One hypothesis on
languages, cultures, and ethics for mind, brain, and education.
Mind, Brain, and Education, 4, 135–148.
della Chiesa, B. (2012). ‘‘Expansion of our own being’’: Language learn-
ing, cultural belonging and global awareness. In B. della Chiesa,
J. Scott, & C. Hinton (Eds.), Languages in a global world: Learning for
better cultural understanding (pp. 437–461). Paris, France: OECD.
Deutscher Bundestag. (2011). Zweiter Zwischenbericht der
Enquete-Kommission ‘‘Internet und digitale Gesellschaft’’—
Medienkompetenz. Drucksache 17/7286. Retrieved Octo-
ber 21, 2011, from http://www.bundestag.de/internetenquete/
dokumentation/Medienkompetenz/Zwischenbericht_
Medienkompetenz_1707286.pdf
Durkheim, E. (1997 [1893]). The division of labor in society. New York,
NY: Free Press.
Erdem, E. (2002). The ‘‘clash of civilizations’’: Revisited after
September 11. Alternatives—Turkish Journal of International Relations
[online], 1(2).
Esser, H. (2000). Assimilation, Integration und ethnische Konflikte:
Können sie durch ‘‘Kommunikation’’ beeinflußt werden? In
H. Schatz, C. Holtz-Bacha, & J.-U. Nieland (Eds.), Migranten und
Medien. Neue Herausforderungen an die Integrationsfunktion von Presse
und Rundfunk (pp. 25–37). Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher
Verlag.
Farrokhzad, S. (2006). Exotin, Unterdrückte und Fundamentalistin.
Konstruktionen der ‘‘fremden Frau’’ in deutschen Medien. In
C. Butterwegge & G. Hentges (Eds.), Massenmedien, Migration und
106
Integration. Herausforderungen für Journalismus und politische Bildung
(pp. 55–86). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
Ferrando, O. (2010, June 18). Violences au Kirghizistan: l’ethnicité a
bon dos! Le Monde. Retrieved June 18, 2010, from http://www.
lemonde.fr/idees/article/2010/06/18/violences-au-kirghizstan-
lethnicite-a-bon-dos_1375184_3232.html
Fleras, A. (2006). The conventional news paradigm as systemic bias:
Re-thinking the (mis-)representational basis of newsmedi-
a–minority relations in Canada. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker
(Eds.), Integration durch Massenmedien. Medien und Migration im
internationalen Vergleich [Mass media: Integration, media and migra-
tion: A comparative perspective], Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 179–222).
Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Freud, S. (1927). Die Zukunft einer Illusion [The future of an illusion]. Leipzig,
Germany: Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlag.
Früh, W. (1994). Realitätsvermittlung durch Massenmedien. Die perma-
nente Transformation der Wirklichkeit. Opladen, Germany: West-
deutscher Verlag.
Geißler, R. (1999). Der bedrohliche Ausländer. Zum Zerrbild
ethnischer Minderheiten in Medien und Öffentlichkeit. In
M. Ottersbach (Ed.), Integration durch soziale Kontrolle? Zu
Kriminalität und Kriminalisierung allochtoner Jugendlicher (pp. 23–38).
Koln, Germany: Der Andere Buchladen.
Geißler, R. (2005). Interkulturelle Integration von Migranten—ein
humaner Mittelweg zwischen Assimilation und Segregation. In
R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Massenmedien und die Integration
ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss, Forschungsstand,
Bibliographie, Medienumbrüche 9 (pp. 45–70). Bielefeld, Germany:
Transcript Verlag.
Geißler, R., & Pöttker, H. (Eds.). (2005a). Massenmedien und
die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problema-
ufriss, Forschungsstand, Bibliographie, Medienumbrüche 9. Bielefeld,
Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Geißler, R., & Pöttker, H. (2005b). Bilanz. In R. Geißler & H.
Pöttker (Eds.), Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Minder-
heiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss, Forschungsstand, Bibliographie,
Medienumbrüche 9 (pp. 391–396). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript
Verlag.
Geißler, R., & Pöttker, H. (Eds.). (2006a). Integration durch Massenme-
dien. Medien und Migration im internationalen Vergleich [Mass Media:
Integration, media and migration: A comparative perspective], Medi-
enumbrüche 17. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Geißler, R., & Pöttker, H. (2006b). Mediale Integration von
Migranten. Ein Problemaufriss. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker
(Eds.), Integration durch Massenmedien. Medien und Migration im inter-
nationalen Vergleich [Mass media: Integration, media and migration: A
comparative perspective], Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 13–44). Bielefeld,
Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Grosser, A. (1987). Die Minderheiten und wir: Die ethnische und
kulturelle Herausforderung. In Bundeszentrale für politische
Bildung (Ed.), AusländerundMassenmedien.BestandsaufnahmeundPer-
spektiven (Vol. 253, pp. 27–35). Bonn. Germany: Bundeszentrale
für politische Bildung.
Haenni Hoti, A. (2005). ‘‘Ausländerkriminalität’’. Ethnisierung eines
sozialen Problems. Terra Cognita, 6, 26–30.
Halm, D. (2006). Die Medien der türkischen Bevölkerung in Deutsch-
land. Berichterstattung, Nutzung und Funktion. In R. Geißler &
H. Pöttker (Eds.), Integration durch Massenmedien. Medien und Migra-
tion im internationalen Vergleich [Mass media: Integration, media and
migration: A comparative perspective], Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 77–92).
Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Volume 6—Number 2
 Vanessa Christoph
Hinton, C. (2012). Cosmopolitan education: Building on a biological
inclination for care in a globalised world. In B. della Chiesa,
J. Scott, & C. Hinton (Eds.), Languages in a global world: Learning for
better cultural understanding (pp. 409–426). Paris, France: OECD.
Huntington, S. P. (2002 [1996]).The clash of civilizations and the remaking
of world order. New York, NY: Free Press.
Jäger, S. (2000). Von deutschen Einzeltätern und ausländischen Ban-
den. Medien und Straftaten. In H. Schatz, C. Holtz-Bacha, &
J.-U. Nieland (Eds.), Migranten und Medien. Neue Herausforderungen
an die Integrationsfunktion von Presse und Rundfunk (pp. 207–216).
Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Lippmann, W. (2004 [1922]). Public opinion. New York, NY: Dover.
Luhmann, N. (2004/1995). Die Realität der Massenmedien [The reality of
the mass media]. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
Merten, K. (1987). Das Bild der Ausländer in der deutschen Presse. In
Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (Ed.), AusländerundMassen-
medien. Bestandsaufnahme und Perspektiven (Vol. 253, pp. 69–78).
Bonn. Germany: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
Moser, H. (2007). Medien und Migration: Konsequenzen und
Schlussfolgerungen. In H. Bonfadelli & H. Moser (Eds.), Medien
und Migration. Europa als multikultureller Raum? (pp. 347–366).
Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
Müller, D. (2005). Die Darstellung ethnischer Minderheiten in
deutschen Massenmedien.In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.),
Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutsch-
land. Problemaufriss, Forschungsstand, Bibliographie, Medienumbrüche 9
(pp. 83–126). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Piga, A. (2007). Mediennutzung von Migranten. Ein Forschungsüber-
blick. In H. Bonfadelli & H. Moser (Eds.), Medien und Migra-
tion. Europa als multikultureller Raum? (pp. 209–234). Wiesbaden,
Germany: VS Verlag.
Pöttker, H. (2005a). Diskriminierungsverbote und Beschwerdepraxis
des Deutschen Presserates. Eine quantitative und qualitative
Analyse. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Massenmedien und
die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss,
Forschungsstand, Bibliographie, Medienumbrüche 9 (pp. 185–221).
Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Pöttker, H. (2005b). Soziale Integration. Ein Schlüsselbegriff für
die Forschung über Medien und ethnische Minderheiten. In
R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Massenmedien und die Integration
ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss, Forschungsstand,
Bibliographie, Medienumbrüche 9 (pp. 25–43). Bielefeld, Germany:
Transcript Verlag.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1995). Literature as exploration. New York, NY:
Modern Language Association of America.
Ruhrmann, G., & Demren, S. (2000). Wie Medien über Migranten
berichten. In H. Schatz, C. Holtz-Bacha, & J.-U. Nieland (Eds.),
Migranten und Medien. Neue Herausforderungen an die Integrationsfunk-
tion von Presse und Rundfunk (pp. 69–81). Wiesbaden, Germany:
Westdeutscher Verlag.
Ruhrmann, G., Sommer, U., & Uhlemann, H. (2006). TV-Nachrich-
tenberichterstattung über Migranten—Von der Politik zum
Terror. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), IntegrationdurchMassen-
medien. Medien und Migration im internationalen Vergleich [Mass media:
Integration, media and migration: A comparative perspective], Medi-
enumbrüche17 (pp. 45–75). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag.
Schatz, H., Holtz-Bacha, C., & Nieland, J.-U. (Eds.). (2000).
Migranten und Medien. Neue Herausforderungen an die Integrationsfunk-
tionvonPresseundRundfunk. Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher
Verlag.
Volume 6—Number 2
Schatz, H., & Nieland, J.-U. (2000). Einführung in die Thematik und
Überblick über die Beiträge. In H. Schatz, C. Holtz-Bacha, &
J.-U. Nieland (Eds.), Migranten und Medien. Neue Herausforderun-
gen an die Integrationsfunktion von Presse und Rundfunk (pp. 11–21).
Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Schimank, U. (2000). Gesellschaftliche Integrationsprobleme im
Spiegel soziologischer Gegenwartsdiagnosen. Berliner Journal für
Soziologie, 10, 449–469.
Schneider, B., & Arnold, A.-K. (2006). Die Kontroverse um die Medi-
ennutzung von Migranten: Massenmediale Ghettoisierung oder
Einheit durch Mainstream? In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.),
IntegrationdurchMassenmedien.MedienundMigrationiminternationalen
Vergleich [Mass media: Integration, media and migration: A comparative
perspective], Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 93–119). Bielefeld, Germany:
Transcript Verlag.
Schöneberg, U. (1987). Gruppenpsychologische Hintergründe der
Fremdenangst und Fremdenfeindlichkeit. In Bundeszentrale für
politische Bildung (Ed.), Ausländer und Massenmedien. Bestandsauf-
nahme und Perspektiven: Vorträge und Materialien einer internationalen
Fachtagung vom 2. bis 4. Dezember 1986 (Vol. 253, pp. 36–57). Bonn.
Germany: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
Six, B., & Schütz, H. (1996). Stereotype und Vorurteile. Hagen, Germany:
Fern Universität.
Sonntag-Wolgast, C. (2000). Migranten und Medien: Wahrneh-
mungs- und andere Probleme. In H. Schatz, C. Holtz-Bacha,
& J.-U. Nieland (Eds.), Migranten und Medien. Neue Herausforderun-
gen an die Integrationsfunktion von Presse und Rundfunk (pp. 63–65).
Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Starck, K. (2006). Embracing unity in diversity: Media and ethnic
minorities in the USA. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Inte-
gration durch Massenmedien. Medien und Migration im internationalen
Vergleich [Mass media: Integration, media and migration: A comparative
perspective], Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 149–178). Bielefeld, Germany:
Transcript Verlag.
Tarozzi, M. (2012). Intercultural or multicultural education in Europe
and the United States. In B. della Chiesa, J. Scott, & C. Hinton
(Eds.), Languages in a global world: Learning for better cultural under-
standing (pp. 393–406). Paris, France: OECD.
Terkessidis, M. (2000). Migranten. Hamburg, Germany: Europäische
Verlagsanstalt.
Todorov, T. (1989). Nous et les autres. La réflexion française sur la diversité
humaine. Paris, France: Seuil.
Weber-Menges, S. (2005). Die Wirkungen der Präsentation eth-
nischer Minderheiten in deutschen Medien. In R. Geißler &
H. Pöttker (Eds.), Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Min-
derheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss, Forschungsstand, Bibliographie,
Medienumbrüche 9 (pp. 127–184). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript
Verlag.
Weber-Menges, S. (2006). Die Entwicklung der Ethnomedien in
Deutschland. In R. Geißler & H. Pöttker (Eds.), Integration durch
Massenmedien. Medien und Migration im internationalen Vergleich [Mass
media: Integration, media and migration: A comparative perspective],
Medienumbrüche 17 (pp. 121–145). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript
Verlag.
Yildiz, E. (2006). Stigmatisierende Mediendiskurse in der kos-
mopolitanen Einwanderungsgesellschaft. In C. Butterwegge &
G. Hentges (Eds.), Massenmedien, Migration und Integration. Heraus-
forderungenfürJournalismus und politischeBildung (pp. 37–53). Wies-
baden, Germany: VS Verlag.
107