Media use, political efficacy and anti-immigrant feelings in host countries

ABSTRACT

How does media use and individualsʼ senses of political efficacy affect their attitudes towards immigrants in southern Europe? While studies of the media offer contrasting results concerning their effects on anti-immigrant sentiments, research on political efficacy shows that citizens who feel able to influence politics may develop more positive attitudes towards immigration. In this article, public perceptions of non-European immigrants, in the host countries, are analysed over time (2014–2017) using Eurobarometer data. By analysing the links between attitudes towards immigration, media use, and political efficacy during the migration crises using multivariate analysis, I find that in times of crisis the use of (traditional and new) media, and political efficacy, positively affect people’s attitudes towards non-European immigration.

KEYWORDS:

• Immigration
• traditional media
• new media
• political efficacy
• immigration crisis
• Southern Europe

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticism, and Francesco Di Paola for his linguistic assistance.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. The source is the Migration Policy Institute.

2. Unlike Arlt and Wolling (2016), I considered radio to be a traditional (or mainstream) media source.

3. The questions read as follows: ‘Please tell me whether any of the following statements evoke a positive or negative feeling for you – Immigration of people from outside the EU’ – where the response categories are: 1) Very positive, 2) Fairly positive, 3) Fairly negative, 4) Very negative, 5) Don’t know. Excluding the ‘don’t know’ answers, the variable was re-coded as follows: 0) Negative, 1) Positive.

4. The questions read as follows: ‘Where do you get most of your news on national political matters?’ The response categories for each medium (television, the press, radio, the Internet, and online social networks) are: 1) Everyday/Almost everyday, 2) Two or three times a week, 3) About once a week, 4) Two or three times a month, 5) Less often, 6) Never. Each variable was re-coded as follows: 0) Never, 1) Less often/About once a week, 2) Two or three times a week + Everyday/Almost everyday. The first index (factor scores) runs from – 1.506 (no use of traditional media) to 4.609 (high use of traditional media), while the second (factor scores) runs from 0 (no use of new media) to 3.171 (high use of new media).

5. The questions read as follows: ‘Please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with each of the following statements: 1) My voice counts in the EU, 2) My voice counts in (our country)’. The response categories for each statement are: 1) Totally agree, 2) Tend to agree, 3) Tend to disagree, 4) Totally disagree. By inverting the order of the modalities and analysing the information through factorial techniques, the index of political efficacy obtained runs from 0 (low level) to 3.171 (high level).

6. The principal effects of the independent variables reported in model 3 were found in Greece, but not in Italy, where only political efficacy and the new media have a positive and statistically significant effect on the dependent variable.

7. Although perceptions of the national economy have been used as a control variable, it represents a determining factor in explaining the variation in feelings towards non-European immigrants.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Memoli Vincenzo

Vincenzo Memoli is Associate Professor at the University of Catania. His main research interests include democracy, public opinion and political behaviour. His most recent publications include Citizens, Europe and The Media (Palgrave - 2016, co-authored with Nicolò Conti) and Attitudes Towards Europe Beyond Euroscepticism - Supporting the European Union through the Crisis (Palgrave - 2016, co-authored with Danilo Di Mauro).