Nefret söyleminin medyada inşası: Suriyeli göçmenler üzerinden Sözcü Gazetesi örneği
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2022
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Bu çalışmanın amacı nefret söyleminin medyada nasıl inşa edildiğini açıklamaktır. Nefret söyleminin üretilmesi ve yaygınlaştırılmasında medya önemli bir araç konumundadır. Medya aracılığıyla üretilen her türlü ayrımcı ve dışlayıcı söylemsel pratikler bir yandan nefret söyleminin yaygınlaşmasına sebep olurken diğer yandan nefret söyleminin toplum içinde kanıksanmasına da neden olmaktadır. Nefret söylemi özellikle toplumsal, siyasal, ekonomik krizler döneminde daha çok tedavüle sokulurken hedef gösterilen grup bütün olumsuzlukların müsebbibi olarak kodlanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda bu çalışma bir nitel araştırma yaklaşımı olan söylem analizi yöntemi ile hazırlanmıştır. Veriler, 2021 yılından başlayarak Türkiye’de seyreden yüksek enflasyon ve döviz kuru döneminde Sözcü Gazetesinin Suriyeli göçmenlerle ilgili yaptığı internet üzerinden ulaşılabilen ekonomik içerikli haberlerden toplanmıştır. Sözcü gazetesinin iktidara muhalif bir gazete olması seçilmesinde etkili olmuştur. Çalışmanın özellikle ekonomik içerikli haberlerde nefret söyleminin nasıl kullanıldığını incelemesi bakımından özgün olduğu düşünülmektedir. Çalışmada, incelenen dönem itibariyle, Sözcü Gazetesinin toplumda oluşan ekonomik kaygıları Suriyeli Göçmenlerin günlük ekonomik faaliyetleri üzerinden tahrik ettiği ve onları bu ekonomik durumun sorumlusu olarak gösterdiği görülmüştür. Sözcü Gazetesi bu haberlerde hedef kitleye karşı hikâyeler oluştururken, hikâyelerde referanslar ve saygın kaynaklara başvurarak haberlerini güçlendirmeye çalışmıştır. Ancak, zaman zaman haberin başlığı ile içeriğinde kullanılan referansların söylemleri örtüşmemiştir. Genellemelerin sıkça kullanıldığı haberlerde ekonomik durumun sebeplerine değinmeden Suriyeliler hedef gösterilmiştir.
Although there is no agreed-upon definition, it is possible to define hate speech as any kind of derogatory, otherizing or sarcastic rhetoric that targets a group or person because of the group to which they belong. The reason for this derogatory, otherizing or sarcastic rhetoric could be one or more of the elements that make up the identity of the interlocutor( s), such as ethnic, religious, color, cultural, lifestyle, gender, physical/mental disability, or sexual orientation. Undoubtedly, one of the most important reasons why there is no consensus on the definition of hate speech is its relationship with freedom of expression. As a matter of fact, freedom of expression and hate speech are considered as phenomena that limit each other’s space. The acceptance of freedom of expression as the basis of contemporary democracy, the potential of restrictions on freedom of expression to damage democratic values, feed concerns and discussions on this issue. On the other hand, the fact that people with different identities are more intertwined or in contact with each other both physically and thanks to communication technologies in a globalized world threatens intercommunal peace in the context of hate speech. Due to the fact that hate speech threatens international and national peace, it has been defined as a crime in international human rights documents and state parties have been asked to take measures in this regard. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommendation No. 97 (20), the United Nations Strategy and Action Plan on Hate Speech, and the assessments of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on the subject are the first documents that come to mind in this regard. The European Court of Human Rights has also ruled that hate speech should not be considered within the scope of freedom of expression in its case-law decisions on the subject. The indispensability of freedom of expression in terms of democracy and, mainly, the necessity of protecting sovereign opinion, sovereign morality, dissenting opinion in the face of the majority, different lifestyles and the minority, as well as the fact that hate speech targets those who are different in society, minorities, and others, constitute the main basis of these decisions. The aim of this study is to reveal how hate speech is produced in the press through economic news during times of economic crisis. It is known that hate speech is a phenomenon that is more often produced during times of war, conflict, economic crisis. During these crisis periods, the targeted group is presented as the opponent of all negativity and is pointed as a target. Based on the fact that hate speech is reproduced in the media during times of economic, political and social crisis, the research focuses on how hate speech directed at Syrian immigrants is constructed in the media during times of crisis. In this context, at a time when the deterioration of economic indicators in Turkey is widely felt in society, the economic news of the newspaper Sözcü about Syrian migrants was based on. In fact, every news story is not independent of the point of view, ideas, approach to the news of the person or the media body that produces that news. The fact that the newspaper is anti-government and criticizes the government’s policies is covered by freedom of expression, according to contemporary legal norms. However, the point here is that the news contains hate speech directed at Syrian migrants, rather than criticism of the government, and they are held responsible for the economic crisis. The study reveals the difference between criticism of government and hate speech in this context. While analyzing the news, Van Dijk’s critical discourse analysis was applied. According to Dijk, critical discourse analysis is a method of analysis that addresses social problems, exposes the discursive features of power relations, sees discourse as a historical and ideological mechanism, tries to explain the connection between society and the text on an interpretive axis, and focuses on the relationship between power and discourse. Not being limited to the text when analyzing news, including both the production processes of the news and how it can be understood by the reader in the analysis process, and the emphasis on the context of the news was effective in choosing this method. The findings reached as a result of the study are as follows: It has been confirmed in this study that hate speech is a phenomenon produced during crisis periods, primarily in selected news of the newspaper. Syrian migrants have been blamed for the deterioration of economic indicators and have been targeted as a group that has taken away the jobs and bread of the Turkish people. Secondly, the newspaper contextually tries to decry migrants as “invaders” by referring to a historical problem between Syria and Turkey, like the case of Hatay, and seeks to provoke social sentiment. Thirdly, as is often the case with hate speech, it has been observed that the Sözcü newspaper often generalizes about Syrians in its selected news stories. It has been found that the language of news is shaped by “we/them”. Syrians are coded as a parasitic group that does not keep up with social life, disrupts order, lives without work. The rhetoric of the news language in selected news stories is built on the phenomenon of a constant threat. Finally, the fact that Syrian migrants are held responsible for the economic crisis, that derogatory and otherizing discourses are used against Syrian migrants, and that there is no direct criticism of the government’s Syrian policy or economic policy, proves the difference between hate speech and criticism of the government. In other words, while the phenomenon of migration is a consequence, the newspaper positions migrants as a cause by using a derogatory, generalizing and otherizing discourse with a method that is often used in hate speech.
Although there is no agreed-upon definition, it is possible to define hate speech as any kind of derogatory, otherizing or sarcastic rhetoric that targets a group or person because of the group to which they belong. The reason for this derogatory, otherizing or sarcastic rhetoric could be one or more of the elements that make up the identity of the interlocutor( s), such as ethnic, religious, color, cultural, lifestyle, gender, physical/mental disability, or sexual orientation. Undoubtedly, one of the most important reasons why there is no consensus on the definition of hate speech is its relationship with freedom of expression. As a matter of fact, freedom of expression and hate speech are considered as phenomena that limit each other’s space. The acceptance of freedom of expression as the basis of contemporary democracy, the potential of restrictions on freedom of expression to damage democratic values, feed concerns and discussions on this issue. On the other hand, the fact that people with different identities are more intertwined or in contact with each other both physically and thanks to communication technologies in a globalized world threatens intercommunal peace in the context of hate speech. Due to the fact that hate speech threatens international and national peace, it has been defined as a crime in international human rights documents and state parties have been asked to take measures in this regard. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommendation No. 97 (20), the United Nations Strategy and Action Plan on Hate Speech, and the assessments of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on the subject are the first documents that come to mind in this regard. The European Court of Human Rights has also ruled that hate speech should not be considered within the scope of freedom of expression in its case-law decisions on the subject. The indispensability of freedom of expression in terms of democracy and, mainly, the necessity of protecting sovereign opinion, sovereign morality, dissenting opinion in the face of the majority, different lifestyles and the minority, as well as the fact that hate speech targets those who are different in society, minorities, and others, constitute the main basis of these decisions. The aim of this study is to reveal how hate speech is produced in the press through economic news during times of economic crisis. It is known that hate speech is a phenomenon that is more often produced during times of war, conflict, economic crisis. During these crisis periods, the targeted group is presented as the opponent of all negativity and is pointed as a target. Based on the fact that hate speech is reproduced in the media during times of economic, political and social crisis, the research focuses on how hate speech directed at Syrian immigrants is constructed in the media during times of crisis. In this context, at a time when the deterioration of economic indicators in Turkey is widely felt in society, the economic news of the newspaper Sözcü about Syrian migrants was based on. In fact, every news story is not independent of the point of view, ideas, approach to the news of the person or the media body that produces that news. The fact that the newspaper is anti-government and criticizes the government’s policies is covered by freedom of expression, according to contemporary legal norms. However, the point here is that the news contains hate speech directed at Syrian migrants, rather than criticism of the government, and they are held responsible for the economic crisis. The study reveals the difference between criticism of government and hate speech in this context. While analyzing the news, Van Dijk’s critical discourse analysis was applied. According to Dijk, critical discourse analysis is a method of analysis that addresses social problems, exposes the discursive features of power relations, sees discourse as a historical and ideological mechanism, tries to explain the connection between society and the text on an interpretive axis, and focuses on the relationship between power and discourse. Not being limited to the text when analyzing news, including both the production processes of the news and how it can be understood by the reader in the analysis process, and the emphasis on the context of the news was effective in choosing this method. The findings reached as a result of the study are as follows: It has been confirmed in this study that hate speech is a phenomenon produced during crisis periods, primarily in selected news of the newspaper. Syrian migrants have been blamed for the deterioration of economic indicators and have been targeted as a group that has taken away the jobs and bread of the Turkish people. Secondly, the newspaper contextually tries to decry migrants as “invaders” by referring to a historical problem between Syria and Turkey, like the case of Hatay, and seeks to provoke social sentiment. Thirdly, as is often the case with hate speech, it has been observed that the Sözcü newspaper often generalizes about Syrians in its selected news stories. It has been found that the language of news is shaped by “we/them”. Syrians are coded as a parasitic group that does not keep up with social life, disrupts order, lives without work. The rhetoric of the news language in selected news stories is built on the phenomenon of a constant threat. Finally, the fact that Syrian migrants are held responsible for the economic crisis, that derogatory and otherizing discourses are used against Syrian migrants, and that there is no direct criticism of the government’s Syrian policy or economic policy, proves the difference between hate speech and criticism of the government. In other words, while the phenomenon of migration is a consequence, the newspaper positions migrants as a cause by using a derogatory, generalizing and otherizing discourse with a method that is often used in hate speech.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Nefret Söylemi, Eleştirel Söylem Analizi, Suriyeli Göçmenler, Medya, Sözcü Gazetesi, Hate Speech, Critical Discourse Analysis, Syrian Migrants, Media, Sözcü Newspaper
Kaynak
Intermedia Uluslararası Hakemli İletişim Bilimleri E-Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
9
Sayı
17
