One of the most terrible things about a national security crisis, real or imagined, is that xenophobic leaders instil fear and terror about people who are different from the majority. It is shockingly easy to do, and is part and parcel of human linguistic cultures. In this section you’ll see how language has been used to wound, hurt, divide, oppress and dehumanise groups of people, with a particular focus on the way migrant peoples are described by people in power (be it journalists, radio hosts or politicians). This kind of language enables people – often otherwise good people – to view other people as less than human.

In August of 2015, a migration debate exploded in the news media. Catalyzed by the shocking photo of a drowned boy washed ashore in Turkey, the migration ‘crisis’, was at the forefront of the news for a month, before fading away again. Still, the migration furore never fully goes away, simmering in the background until every now and again a populist leader will invoke a new ‘crisis’ and the issue will return to the forefront of the news cycle. As I write this (Nov 2025) we seem to be at another inflection point where immigration is once again a hot topic in news and political discourse.

In this section, we’re going to explore the topic of migration through the lens of language, the words and images people use to frame the migration debate in ways that further certain ideological positions. We’ll encounter language that dehumanises and objectifies, language that categorises, assumes, derides, divides, and villainises. We’ll also see language that rehumanises, cutting through the media noise to tell stories of living people with hopes, dreams and dignity. Begin your study by choosing one or two of these articles to read and report back on what you find out:

• Stop Dehumanising Migrants (Common Dreams opinion column)
• Swarms, Floods and Marauders: the toxic metaphors of the migrant debate (Guardian article)
• UK press is the most aggressive in reporting on Europe’s migrants (Conversation article)
• The Dehumanizing History of Immigration Words (thinkprogress article by Esther Yu-Hsi Lee)
• We Deride Them as ‘Migrants’ (Guardian article)
• Swarm or Plague? (article by Frankie Boyle)
• Major News Outlets Use Inflammatory Language (from Latino Reporter)
• Migrants and refugees in the news: Prevalence, representation and framing in international media coverage
• The Most Dramatic Shift in Public Opinion (Atlantic article by Roge Karma)
• Illegal ‘Alien’ is a Slur (The Commonwealth Times editorial)
• Refugees in the Media: How Images Dehumanise (Conversation article)

Reading Challenge

This is a longer and more challenging text, but spending time on this piece, and discussing it with your teacher, will help you master this topic:

• How the Media Contributed to the Migrant Crisis (Long Read at the Guardian)

Discussion Points

After you’ve got your head around the material in this section, pair up, pick a question, spend five minutes thinking and noting down your thoughts – then discuss your ideas with a friend and report back to the class:

1. Combatting hate speech is a laudable aim; however, in order to stop someone spreading hate speech that person might have to be censored or silenced. How can hate speech be countered while upholding the freedom of speech that is a central tenet of many democratic societies?

1. Dehumanising Language

“No I don’t care. Show me pictures of coffins, show me bodies floating in the water… I still don’t care.”

from an opinion column in The Sun, 2015

The language of dehumanisation plays a pivotal role in shaping perception around migration. Migrants are often talked about using metaphors and labels that strip away individuality and humanity, reducing people to abstract threats or burdens. For instance, terms like “flood,” “wave,” or “influx” evoke natural disasters, suggesting uncontrollable forces rather than human beings. Similarly, labels such as “illegal” or “alien” construct migrants as outsiders who violate norms, reinforcing narratives of danger and illegitimacy. This linguistic framing does more than describe: it influences perception and policy, legitimising extreme responses and fostering fear. By examining these metaphors, we’ll uncover how language becomes a tool to define who belongs and who does not.

• Language of Dehumanisation: Metaphors of Migrant Discourse (PPT)

Activity: Words Matter

The terms we use to describe people moving across borders (such as alien, immigrant, migrant, or undocumented person) carry legal meanings, cultural connotations, and political weight. This comparison chart (embedded above) helps us see how language shapes perception: some words sound neutral, others evoke fear or sympathy, and some are criticised for being dehumanising or euphemistic. By examining these differences, we can better understand how terminology influences public opinion and debate, and how language impacts the lived experiences of migrants. Use this chart as a starting point for critical discussion: Which words feel fair? Which reinforce stereotypes? And how can we choose language that is both accurate and respectful? Below is a copy of the comparison chart and a discussion activity for you to try:

• Migration Terms Comparison Chart and Discussion (PDF)

2. Critical Discourse Analysis

“Words can do immeasurable good and also terrible injuries… language is a powerful instrument in constructing identities and exercising power.”

Ruth Wodak, Language, Power and Identity, 2011

Critical Discourse Analysis is an approach to studying language that goes beyond words on the page. It examines how spoken, written, or visual language (discourse) reflects and reinforces power, ideology, and social inequality. CDA assumes language is never neutral: the way we talk about issues (like migration) shapes reality and influences policy. Leading scholars have developed key approaches to CDA. Norman Fairclough argues that language is a social practice, deeply tied to power structures, and shows how discourse both reflects and reproduces dominance. Teun van Dijk focuses on the cognitive dimension, exploring how media discourse shapes public attitudes and stereotypes through strategies like the ‘ideological square,’ which frames ‘Us versus Them.’ And Ruth Wodak emphasises historical and political context in her Discourse-Historical Approach, revealing how narratives evolve and gain legitimacy over time.

Critical Discourse Analysis helps us see how narratives are ‘framed’ in certain ways. Framing refers to the way information is presented to shape how people interpret an issue. It’s not just what is said, but how it’s said. For example, describing migration as a ‘crisis’ or ‘invasion’ frames it as a threat, while calling it a ‘humanitarian challenge’ frames it as an issue of compassion and responsibility. Frames influence emotions, priorities, and even policy decisions. In this section, we’ll look at how different media outlets use framing devices, such as metaphors, tone, and emphasis, to create specific narratives about migration. By recognising these frames, we can become more critical listeners and readers and understand how language shapes public opinion.

Activity: Framing Migration

Below are some excerpts from the political debate around migration and, separately, some images sourced from different media. Work together to decide how each speaker or writer ‘frames’ their views on migration (one excerpt may frame the issue in more than one way). Once you’ve decided how the issue is framed, choose which image you would use to illustrate the excerpt. Prepare to justify your choice of image by explaining how the visual rhetoric matches the verbal framing of the issue:

• Migration Discourse Frames
• Political Speech Excerpts
• Images

3. Refugee Voices

“You won’t believe what I’m about to say…”

Fawad’s Story, told at Refugee Voices

So far, we have seen how refugees and migrants are othered and labelled by political rhetoric and mass media reportage. The most important voices in determining representation – those of refugees and migrants themselves – is almost always missing from this picture. However, recent counter-narratives are working to correct this imbalance. Initiatives like Refugee Voices, Telling the Real Story, and #MeWeSyria invite displaced people to share their journeys in their own words, reclaiming agency and dignity. These campaigns aim to dismantle stereotypes by highlighting resilience, aspiration, and individuality, fostering empathy and framing displaced people as neighbours, friends, and contributors to society. Across all these campaigns, and many more, a powerful connective theme emerges: the shift from portraying refugees as passive victims to amplifying their own voices, reminding viewers and listeners that behind every statistic is a human story.

Activity: Investigate a Refugee Storytelling Campaign

Choose one campaign from the list below that works to humanise refugees through personal narratives. Spend time exploring the materials you find, paying close attention to how refugees are presented. As you browse, make detailed notes about what stands out about how refugees are represented, what emotions the campaign evokes, and how the campaign returns voices to let refugees speak in their own words. Once you have gathered your observations, prepare a short summary of the campaign. In your summary, address these key questions:

1. What stereotypes or dominant narratives does the campaign challenge? For example, does it move beyond portraying refugees as helpless victims or passive recipients of aid?
2. How does the campaign present refugees in ways that shape a new narrative?
3. What techniques does it use to achieve this? Consider whether it relies on first-person storytelling, powerful visuals, emotional tone, or other elements.

Your goal is to show how the campaign reframes the conversation about refugees by giving them agency and voice. This exercise will help you understand the role of storytelling in shifting public attitudes and creating empathy.

Learner Portfolio: Framing the Debate

Sometimes it seems like we live in a divided and polarised world where every issue has its supporters and detractors. And while this might be depressing from a political or social point of view, from the point of view of a student of language, debates are a rich source of information. Choose a debate that interests you and that is polarising (divides people into two camps). Think topics such as abortion, the death penalty, gun control, genetic engineering, Brexit, eating meat… I’m sure you can think of ideas of your own as well. Your task is to research how each side of the debate would frame the issue, using language in specific ways to further their own agenda, possibly by attacking the other side at the same time.

Take the topic of genetic engineering. To its supporters, the ability to rewrite the DNA of living organisms is a ‘tremendous breakthrough’, potentially leading to ‘new therapies’ or ‘treatments’. To detractors, however, this kind of science is a moral ‘minefield’ or a ‘grave development’ – potentially leading to new ‘weapons of mass destruction’!

Choose how you would like to present your research: a chart, mind-map, essay, cartoon, or even the transcript of a debate between two people with opposing points of view. Here’s a sample of a fantastic piece of research, written up by a student with an interest in genome editing with ambitions to study in this field in the future which you can use to inspire your own Learner Portfolio writing.

Body of Work: Angelina Jolie’s Political Speeches

“I am here today to say that refugees are not numbers. They’re not even just refugees. They are mothers and daughters and fathers and sons… they are individuals all.”

Angelina Jolie, Speaking on World Refugee Day, 2009

On World Refugee Day in 2009, Angelina Jolie, in her role with UNHCR, gave this moving speech calling for greater understanding for refugees… one of many she would give over her time working for the UN.

Angelina Jolie is widely recognised not only as an acclaimed actress but also as one of the most influential humanitarian advocates of the past two decades, particularly for her work with refugees through the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). She has been a leading voice for refugees worldwide, using her platform to influence international policy and mobilise support for displaced communities. As UNHCR Special Envoy, she engaged with governments and global institutions to push refugee protection onto the diplomatic agenda, championing solutions for large-scale crises and amplifying the voices of those forced to flee. Her work helped bring urgent attention to conflicts from Syria to Myanmar, making refugee rights a priority in global discussions.

In this Body of Work you will find five speeches delivered during Angelina Jolie’s time working with the UN in her roles as Ambassador for Refugees and Special Envoy for Refugees. At the heart of her advocacy is the humanisation of refugees. Jolie consistently reminds audiences that displaced people are not statistics but individuals with dignity, resilience, and rights. She often shares personal stories (anecdotes) from her field visits, using descriptive language to make the experiences, suffering, and strength of refugees relatable and real for her listeners.

Towards Assessment: Individual Oral

Supported by an extract from one non-literary text and one from a literary work, students will offer a prepared response of 10 minutes, followed by 5 minutes of questions by the teacher, to the following prompt: Examine the ways in which the global issue of your choice is presented through the content and form of two of the texts that you have studied. (40 marks)

An extract from one of Angelina Jolie’s speeches would make a fantastic text to use to create your Individual Oral. Her themes and ideas include: the humanisation of displaced people, collective responsibility, fairness and justice, all of which express the core values of several Fields of Inquiry. Her words are more than simple statements of fact and opinion: they are a call to action to policymakers, politicians, and the general listener, reminding us of ethical boundaries and our shared humanity with others who are often demonised. Below are one or two ways you might combine Angelina Jolie’s speeches with a literary work you may have studied. However, you should always be mindful of your own ideas and class discussions and follow the direction of your own thoughts, discussions and programme of study when devising your assessment tasks:

Towards Assessment: Higher Level Essay

Students submit an essay on one non-literary text or a collection of non-literary texts by one same author, or a literary text or work studied during the course. The essay must be 1,200-1,500 words in length. (20 marks).

If you are an HL student, you might consider writing your HL Essay about Angelina Jolie’s speeches. Here are one or two examples of lines of inquiry suitable for this text – but remember to follow your own interests and the direction of your own class discussion to generate your own line of inquiry. It is not appropriate for students to submit responses to an essay question that has been assigned:

• How does Angelina Jolie use personal and emotional appeals to influence political discourse on refugees in her speeches from 2009 – 2021?
• How does Angelina Jolie balance emotional engagement with diplomatic persuasion so as to appeal to different listeners in her speeches from 2009 – 2021?

Further Reading

• The Press and Immigration (sub-scribe article)
• Hate Speak (Figures of Speech article by Caitlin Moran)
• Hard Questions: Hate Speech (a Meta article)
• The Cost of Code-Switching (TedTalk by Chandra Arthur)
• The Ugly History of the Word ‘Infest’ (article at Forward by Aviya Kushner)
• Routed Magazine (homepage)
• The Migration Debate (video explainer by Mixed Migration Center)
• The Use of Dehumanizing Rhetoric in The War On Terror
• Stop Funding Hate (online campaign)
• Immigration and Insecurity: Post 9/11 Fears in The United States
• Normalising the Extreme 2024 (at the Mixed Migration Centre)
• Why We Have So Many Words For People of Colour (Code Switch article at NPR)