Next Article in Journal
Satirizing News Media, Changing Taiwan’s Feelings: The Night Night Show with Brian Tseng’s Adaptation of the American Satire News Format
Previous Article in Journal
Confessions of a Monopoly: The Covert Decision Making of the Early BBC
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Journalism and Media
Volume 4
Issue 4
10.3390/journalmedia4040069
journalmedia-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Gender and Identity Intersectionality: Evidence from the Spanish Press Coverage of Migrant and/or Racialized Women †

by
Rafael Durán
Department of Politics, Faculty of Law, University of Málaga, 29003 Málaga, Spain
†
This paper is part of a larger project (PID2021-122498NB-I00) funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. The author would like to express gratitude to the three reviewers for their valuable insights and suggestions. The usual proviso about responsibility also applies in this case.
Journal. Media 2023, 4(4), 1079-1096; https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia4040069
Submission received: 27 July 2023 / Revised: 29 September 2023 / Accepted: 17 October 2023 / Published: 19 October 2023
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Society and scholars have debated the representation of both women and either immigrants or Muslims in the media and how this representation might affect possible racist behavior and public policy choices. This study responds to the need for a better understanding of the intersectional media representation of migrant and/or racialized women. Framing analysis was conducted on the 234 clippings in which the six most popular Spanish broadsheet newspapers referred to the women in question throughout 2021. We observed that these women are underrepresented and that the opinion the press tends to shape varies depending on the women’s identity marker (Muslim, immigrant and/or Black) and the ideology of the dailies (leftist or rightist). Finally, it is relevant whether a newspaper is published in a territory with a large foreign and Muslim population.

1. Introduction

There were 923,879 foreigners registered in Spain in 2000. Two decades later, that population has increased almost sixfold. They have not only become part of the host society as a matter of fact—aggressions, discriminations, and rejections aside—but also via acquisition of nationality. Throughout the two decades, immigrant women have accounted for an average of 48% year by year. Additionally, 55% of the 1,242,018 naturalizations that have taken place throughout the second decade of the century have been for women.1
Spain has become a multicultural country, transcending its constitutive territorial diversity. Scholars are currently examining both the discourses and the attitudes and behaviors of Western native populations and their elites regarding the Other, as well as the extent to which it is accepted or rejected as part of Us. As a result, questions have arisen as to whether migrant or racialized people experience a system of oppression and/or discrimination rooted in racism, both prior to and after their settlement. Gender could be a variable interfering in these power dynamics. This paper aims to explore their potential intersectionality, using Spain as a study case. We will analyze, on the one hand, the image that the media portray and construct of immigrant or racialized women (hereafter referred to as IRW); on the other hand, we will examine the extent to which that image excludes them from Us and (symbolically) imprisons them in a stereotype that is either threatening or disempowering, among other possibilities.

2. State of the Art

2.1. Intersectionality

Intersectionality is a feminist concept (coined by Crenshaw (1989) and reworked by herself (Crenshaw 1991)) in the context of Black American feminism and “Critical Legal Studies”. Crenshaw conceptualized that Black women in the US suffer or are likely to suffer discrimination in a way that neither women nor people racialized by their Blackness separately experience. The awareness of this phenomenon and the use and development of the concept have allowed scholars to research the way in which social and individual conditions such as gender, ethnicity, religious affiliation, class, age and/or disability, among others, structure the identity of people and the communities to which they are ascribed and based on which they are discriminated against. Hence, intersectionality is also referred to as multiple discrimination, which is different from additive discriminations. Intersectionality has contributed, in the political–institutional field, to “revealing the unwanted effects of social exclusion that are reproduced and reinforced by law and public policies” (La Barbera 2017, p. 191; see La Barbera and Espinosa-Fajardo 2022).
Interestingly, as a theory and a methodology, intersectionality is a “framework for analyzing systems of power” (Winer 2021, p. 2). Namely, personal and social categories are “a product of established power” (Barrère 2016, p. 460). Barrère specifies, in this regard, that, while identity refers to the subject, to speak of categories is to think of power relations; that is, of “discrimination/subordination systems” (2016, p. 457). Gutmann (2003) opts for the term “markers”.
Insofar as there is discrimination and/or subordination based on ethnicity and culture (religion being part of it), as there is discrimination and/or subordination based on sex and gender diversity, there exists the risk that discrimination and/or oppression go unnoticed when different categories intersect, fundamentally because of the tendency to see communities defined by isolated markers as homogeneous. Kessel (2022), for example, studies how the analysis of “rape culture” in strictly patriarchal terms neglects explanatory dimensions of power such as white supremacism, heteronormativity, and capitalist exploitation. In the case of Muslim women (the veiled ones in particular), religion seems to crosscut them in particular, in addition to gender (as they are conceived in relation to the patriarchy which they would be subjected to), and religion is commonly associated with their will and/or capacity for integration, regardless of their nationality and the origin of their parents.
Crenshaw distinguished three types of intersectionality: structural, political–institutional, and “representational”. The latter is of a symbolic nature, and she refers to it as a “cultural construction” (Crenshaw 1991, p. 1245). The media coverage and other narratives construct identities, portray images, and define the violence exercised against disadvantaged subjects—Black women in Crenshaw’s study. Ultimately, there is a production and a reproduction of inequalities and marginalizations (Verloo 2006). In this article, we analyze the image that the media constructs of IRW in Spain. We will consider the media coverage of this intersection between female condition and assigned ethnicity, as well as the extent to which these markers are intertwined with other axes that generate stigmatization and marginalization, such as religion or income source.

2.2. The Media Construction of Migratory and Muslim Realities

Mass media select and frame information. In doing so, they affect opinions, attitudes, and ultimately, given their performativeness (Chouliaraki and Zaborowski 2017, p. 616), the behaviors of those who are exposed to them and even of larger groups (Edwards and Rushin 2018). The selection and prioritization contribute to setting the agenda of issues of public interest. In adopting a point of view—a frame—the media help us to understand and give meaning to the issues they report on. For the leading author of the qualitative studies, “the news media do not passively describe or record newsworthy events in the world, but actively (re)construct them” (Van Dijk 1997, p. 79). The content analysis of the referred aspects of media discourse and its incidence in power relations is carried out through the corresponding theories of agenda setting and framing. Entman has referred to them as “tools of power” (Entman 2007, p. 163). The largest empirical social-scientific production around the media coverage of minorities and the migratory phenomenon is the one based on the framing theory. It is a research field that has barely been explored in relation to the Spanish case (Durán 2020; Ardèvol-Abreu 2015). This paper aims to fill this gap, which is even larger in relation to intersectionality. Dealing with such research is even more justified, insofar as Spain has become one of the top destinations for international migrants, trailing only behind Germany, the UK, and France in Europe (McAuliffe et al. 2021, p. 25). Spain is also leading the European growth in permanent flows (p. 29) and ranks as the European country with the sixth-largest share of migrants in its population, after Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, Germany, and Belgium (p. 89).
Framing theory analyzes how the media induces in the public a way of understanding and thinking about the issues they address (Scheufele and Iyengar 2014). Frames involve assignments of meaning and assumptions of reality. The definition of the object that is reported implies the identification of the subject, an aspect that, in turn, has made it advisable to attend to the voices with which news stories are elaborated. This is how the subjects are either present or silenced in the narratives, thus being “subjects of voice” or not (Chouliaraki and Zaborowski 2017). These are aspects that, insofar as they contribute to shaping public opinion, also contribute to making public policies more or less repressive, restrictive, and exclusionary in relation to racialized or racializable groups.
Kteily and Bruneau (2017) have observed a statistical relationship between having dehumanizing attitudes towards Mexican immigrants in the US and supporting both the anti-immigration policies defended by Trump and his candidacy for the Presidency of the country. Utych (2018), on his own, has verified that exposure to dehumanizing rhetoric favors a preference for restrictive migration policies. Grigorieff et al. (2016) observed, on the one hand, that those who are exposed to news that informs tend to have a better opinion about immigrants and favor reception and integration policies; on the other hand, they noted the incidence of ideology that those who define themselves on the right change their attitude to a greater extent than those who are left-wing. It is worth relating this finding to the study by Vyncke and Van Gorp (2018) on the destigmatizing effectiveness of framing strategies that aim to neutralize or question public stigmas.
Five approaches have been detected by Roggeband and Vliegenthart (2007) in their comparison of both the media and political discourses about immigration and the integration of immigrants. Only one of them is of a positive nature. While the other four make a problem of immigration, the one that has acquired the most presence since 9/11 has been (focused on values and culture) the Islam-as-threat frame.
Citizens are more likely to support policies that harm Muslims if they have received more exposure to coverage that depicts Muslims as terrorists. Saleem et al. (2015) qualify that this mainly affects conservatives in the short term. Isani and Silverman (2016) have found that foreign-policy preferences are modulated depending on whether citizens are exposed to information about Muslim actors saying that the reason behind the policies that the latter promote is their religion. Such politicization of Islam has a more potent effect on people with conservative leanings. While left-wing citizens and culturally liberals have more positive attitudes towards immigrants than right-leaning individuals and conservatives, they are nevertheless more critical of those who make their religion, whatever it may be, their way of life (Helbling and Traunmüller 2020). They consider that fundamentalism is contrary to liberal values.
Those who are exposed to negative coverage of Muslims are also more restrictive of rights in the domestic realm, and more favorable to such policies than those who are exposed to positive approaches, and religious identity is the criterion to which to apply restriction (Andersen et al. 2012). The fact that a negative frame predominates does not imply that it is the only one (Roggeband and Vliegenthart 2007). Anderson (2015) has compared the coverage with an “open” or “closed” focus on issues relating to Muslims and Islam, and she has observed a variation in time in favor of the first. Additionally, with a binary approach, Bowe et al. (2015) have studied the US coverage after 9/11, paying attention to the tone; that is, to the extent to which Muslims appear as members of the society to which they contribute (“positive” frame), or as a threat to it (“negative” frame), and have concluded that, with the negative coverage predominating over the positive, it is a third frame, the neutral one, that has the greatest presence.
The diversity and frequency of frames varies depending on the editorial line, the type of newspaper (tabloid or broadsheet) and the territory, at least in the case of countries with sub-state nationalisms. Baker et al. (2013a, 2013b) have observed more balanced coverage in left-wing newspapers and a greater tendency to associate Islam with terrorism among tabloids. Scalvini, on his part, deduces that “the conservative press expresses a concern with the rising cultural and religious diversity”, while the progressive press focuses more on “promoting social cohesion and pursuing the joint goals of inclusion and integration” (Scalvini 2016, p. 624). Berbers et al. (2016) have found that quality newspapers and left-wing ones adopt less problematic frames of Islam than tabloids and right-wing newspapers, and that Flemish ones opt for an episodic framing, unlike the Walloons (contextual frame).

2.3. The Media Construction of the Intersectional Reality: The Feminine Dimension of the Migratory and Muslim Realities

There is a broad range of literature on intersectionality. Not so many studies have applied it to the way in which the media represent the female Other, and thus help to shape public opinion. Nielsen (2013) has studied the extent to which the media coverage of Sotomayor’s nomination for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court focused on her Latinness and/or on the fact that she is a woman.2 By confronting ethnicity and gender as well, but regarding the media coverage of political candidates, Zacharias and Arthurs (2008) have analyzed the rivalry between Obama (a Black candidate from a Kenyan paternal family) and Clinton (a woman) during the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries (see Major and Coleman 2008; Gibbons 2022). Although being a woman or belonging to a minority does not negatively affect the coverage received by candidacies for the US Congress, those who embody the convergence of both identity dimensions do receive less and worse media attention (Gershon 2012). With women candidates from ethnic minorities receiving more media attention in the UK than their white counterparts, the coverage they receive is exceptionally negative and focused on their ethnic and gender dimensions (Ward 2017).
Liu (2022) concludes that the media focus on men when immigration is understood in economic terms, while they focus on women when immigration is understood in cultural terms. Thus, there is a tendency to generate an opinion of the impact of immigration which is different depending on the gender of those who, at the same time, are marked by foreignness and/or ethnoculturality. In a complementary way, Lind and Meltzer (2021) have verified a media underrepresentation of immigrant women with respect to their demographic weight. Mattoscio and MacDonald (2018) do not address that silencing or concealment of migrant women in the media coverage of international migration, but the gender dimension of it. The authors pay particular attention both to the insecurity for Western women (understood as white women) resulting from the arrival of men coming from the global South, and to the stereotyped roles with which migrant women are depicted: victims of human trafficking or smuggling, domestic service workers, etc.
In his study of visual narratives, Gabrielli has verified this gender dimension because the coverage of border tensions regarding irregular migrations “constructs a male dominant representation—virile and almost warlike—(...) that tends to promote distance emotion and fear in the observer”, while “the women who manage to cross the border (...) are portrayed individually, (...) driving the public reaction towards compassion and eventual empathy” (Gabrielli 2022, pp. 40–41). In their comparative analysis, Martinez Lirola and Zammit (2017) deduce that the representation of immigrants that links them to illegality and health problems makes it easier for them to be seen as alien to Us, i.e., as threatening Others. They also observe that while in the Australian press, their representation as workers tends to make them inspiring and successful women, in the Spanish press they are reduced to low-paid occupations in which they are exploited.
By analyzing the images used by the media to cover the humanitarian crisis of refugees between 2013 and 2017, Amores et al. (2020) have corroborated the underrepresentation and stereotyped representation of the women under study, leading to an image of them as inoffensive, vulnerable, submissive subjects associated with religious symbols. Although they are not portrayed as a direct threat to the host society (unlike their male peers), it is concluded, in relation to intersectionality, that gender-biased coverage leaves these women out of the conquests of both feminism and the anti-racist movement. Due to the performativeness of journalism, the media would be contributing to reproduce power relations and support policies that cause such women to be “victims of more structural violence than the displaced men, and than the native women” (Amores et al. 2020, p. 309).
Regarding the feminine dimension of Islam, the veil is used in the British and Spanish media systems “to support the political discourse that uses the hijab visibility in the public sphere as a way to activate fear” (Khir-Allah 2021, p. 165). The media absence of veiled women’s voices in Spain makes it difficult for citizens to have a complex understanding of its scope and meaning (Khir-Allah 2021, p. 166). The British media representation of the Muslim population others them and defines them by their ethnic culture and by the categories of gender and class (Alkhammash 2020). Khan and Mythen doubt the growth of Islamophobic hate crimes alongside the growth of hate discourse in the media is casual (Khan and Mythen 2018). It is worth noting, with regard to the Spanish case and the differences between media, that both the conservative Abc and the liberal La Vanguardia opt for a problematic framing of Muslim women and clothing, compared to the left-wing El País, although these two coincide in considering the relationship between Islam and Spain in a mostly unproblematic way (Durán 2020).

3. Materials and Methods

The subject of our study are immigrant or racialized women in Spain. The opinion about IRW, as well as the behaviors induced by such opinions and attitudes, are not determined by their factual foreignness, but by the perception that the rest of the people mostly have of them as foreigners and immigrants, i.e., as alien to the host society. That is why both Muslim women residing in Spain, whatever their nationality, and foreign women who have Spain as their destination or first European stage of their migration project, are analytically considered IRW as well.
By applying the framing theory with an intersectional approach, the aim of this paper is to analyze the extent to which the Spanish press reports on IRW and whether it does so, on the one hand, in an inclusive or exclusionary way (they are women who are part of Us vs. they are a feminine Other), and on the other, in a positive or negative way, i.e., as a problematic female alien. Our research is therefore deductive in nature—we explore the extent to which those pre-defined frames occur in the news. Both pairs of frames have proven to be relevant when reviewing the literature and are highlighted as remarkable in addressing hate discourse and policies.3 We add a third frame in each binomial: the neutral frame. We code clippings as “neutral”—regarding either inclusiveness/exclusiveness or positivity/negativity—whenever the coverage is confused, ambivalent or imprecise. On such occasions, given the impossibility or difficulty of determining a given frame, it can be concluded that the information coverage does not tend to shape public opinion in one way or another (Anderson 2015; Bowe et al. 2015).
As a first hypothesis (h1), we expect to find a scarce presence of IRW in the media discourse. We also foresee (h2) a mostly exclusionary and negative coverage of IRW, whether they are presented as a threat or a burden for Us or framed in a context of submission, oppression, exploitation and/or marginality, that is, as a direct or indirect source of problems. Thirdly, it is to be expected that left-wing media will be more inclusive and positive in framing IRW, unlike the right-wing media (h3).
The frames are the result of three analytical categories: (1) the identification of the subject (what profile or profiles are portrayed by the media when referring to IRW); (2) the voices of the discourse (on whom does the press rely to build its narrative about IRW), and (3) the definition or identification of the news item (what topics are covered).
The database is made up of clippings from the four mainstream Spanish newspapers with the most daily readers in 2021, the year under study—from more to less readers, the leftist El País (henceforth, EP) and the rightist El Mundo (EM), Abc (ABC) and La Razón (LR)—as well as the two most-read ones in Catalonia—La Vanguardia (LV) and El Periódico (EPer).4 The surveys of the Spanish Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas also endorse the selection in view of its data regarding those who read the press “to follow political and electoral information.”5 EP is the most read newspaper by those who place themselves in ideological positions 1 (extreme left) to 5 or 6, while EM is the one that is most exposed to by those who position themselves on the right, starting from position 6, followed by or alternating with ABC. Readers of ideological positions 7–9 tend to expose themselves, in third place, to LR. LV stands out as the newspaper of reference for voters of the Catalan political formations that receive the most votes among the parties that are more critical oof the current territorial organization of the Spanish State—leftist ERC and rightist Junts. EPer largely reproduces that scheme, though it has fewer readers, is less read by Junts voters, and competes with LV for the voters of leftist En Comú Podem. These are relevant data insofar as selective exposure to mass media reveals the editorial line of the media. The sample of newspapers includes, in turn, four newspapers published with a national vocation and two that are significant to Catalan in scope, relevant because Catalonia is where the largest foreign and Muslim populations are registered (2022 Population Census; UCIDE 2022).
The units of analysis result from a search of MyNews—a digital newspaper repository—for the terms “wom*n” and “female foreigner*” and/or “migrant*” and/or “female refugee*” and/or “Islam”and/or “female Muslim*” and/or “wom*n of color” and/or “diversity”. The database is made up of 234 clippings. The coronavirus pandemic persisted throughout 2021, but a general confinement was not decreed again, as the borders were not closed again, nor were there outstanding events (related to either migrations or terrorist attacks) with an impact on Spanish or European public opinion. Thus, 2021 is not an exceptional year. This makes it ideal for this study, since we aim to analyze the normality that is constructed through the media over a continuous period of time. It is the normality that becomes “habitus”, i.e., the “common sense” of each historic time (Bourdieu 2007, p. 117).

4. Results: Intersectionality and Media Framing

4.1. Presence of IRW in the Press Discourse

Table 1 shows a first approximation to the presence of IRW in the media discourse. Out of the total of 234 clippings (M = 39 for the six newspapers analyzed), media coverage oscillates between 28 units by EM and 53 by EPer. As to the number of words, ABC dedicates less space, and EPer appears again as the outlet that offers the most data. Given the numbers from LR and, to a lesser extent, from EP, it is not possible to deduce from that evidence a greater coverage by the left-wing press. Neither does the territorial factor appear as an explanatory one: EPer and LV offer more texts than the arithmetic mean of the total 234 in our database (53 and 43, respectively), but there is no pattern on the part of the Madrid newspapers. On the other hand, while EPer offer the highest coverage by words as well, LV is below the average of the six newspapers and only above ABC and EM. Finally, the analysis of the clippings based on their journalistic nature (in gray in the table) does not allow us to observe significant patterns either, except for the fact that the newspapers that have published below the average (in each of the four journalistic genres) are conservative—ABC and EM.
These data tell us little about the extent to which IRW are really the object of press attention. This is because the clippings in our database are those in which such women are present, to whatever extent. On occasion, they appear as a central or relevant topic, and on others, in a complementary or punctual way. Therefore, Table 2 is more relevant. IRW were the subject of specific coverage in less than half of the texts studied (n = 98). The conservative ABC and EM are several points below the arithmetic mean (M = 16) in number of such pieces. Even if at a greater distance, EP is also below the average (two points, in Table 2 as in Table 1), and it is observed again in the Catalan newspapers and in the conservative LR that media attention is greater. As a matter of fact, LR is the newspaper that mostly covers IRW. Narrowly, EPer outperforms it in terms of words. If LR stands out for its high coverage (relatively and in quantitative terms), at the opposite extreme we find another conservative newspaper, ABC, whose totals of clippings and words are not only below average, but below half the average. Neither ABC nor EM published opinion pieces, a modality in which EP, EPer and LV are above average, and ABC does not pay attention to IRW through interviews. Thus, the underinformation found in EM, which is greater than in EP, is therefore even higher in ABC.
Not all clippings focused on IRW make them visible in their headlines and other highlighted parts (n = 82, 84%), although explicit reference to them is made in the headlines of texts that deal with other issues and/or people. Specifically, IRW are present in the highlights of 121 clippings (52%), and again, ABC, EM and EP are below average, while EPer, LR, and LV are above average (see Table 3).

4.2. IRW and Us

A total of 1569 explicit references to IRW have been coded in the 234 units of analysis. 68% (see Table 4) represent IRW as alien to Us, whether they are made up of people who reside in or are from Spain or who are attached either to broader territories (Europe, the E.U. or the West) or to countries that are part of them. Most of the excluding records (64%) are of immigrant women, among whom we also include those who are or have died or disappeared during the migratory process. They are followed at a great distance (9%) by Muslims.
Regardless of their ethnocultural profile, 17% of the records correspond to women with respect to whom a neutral frame is adopted as to whether or not they belong to Us. In other words, according to the image that is portrayed of them, it cannot be inferred if they are part of the autochthonous population. The majority of IRW on whom a neutral frame is adopted are Muslims (72% of coded records). They are followed, although 58 points below, by women who identify as Blacks or Afro-descendants. This is a group for which social scientists have carried out little research on the Spanish case and which emerges in the media discourse in a positive way (see below).
The inclusive frame is the least present. Out of the three largest ethnocultural groups (immigrant, Muslim, and Black women), two-thirds of the inclusive records are related to Muslim women. When the three groups are analyzed separately (percentages in brackets in Table 4), the press offers a mostly inclusive image of Black women (61% of their records). Although the references to Muslim women are mostly neutral, the inclusive coverage exceeds the exclusionary one by more than 12 points. This is almost the only frame, on the contrary, in the case of immigrant women.
The diversity of frames is also evident when attending to the outlets individually. All the newspapers adopt mostly an exclusionary frame with respect to immigrant women6, although only in the case of ABC and EM this is the only frame. Neutral or inclusive allusions, however, barely oscillate between four in LR and 13 in LV. Muslim women receive a mostly exclusionary coverage only by ABC, which does not offer inclusive allusions. The other newspapers cover them, resorting to the three frames. Allusions are mostly inclusive only in the case of EP. However, in EM, EPer, LR, and LV the coverage is mostly neutral, and the inclusive frame is the second one in LR and LV, a newspaper where neutral records more than triple exclusionary ones.
Regarding Black women, who are practically absent in ABC and EP7, and without presence in EM, the coverage is solely inclusive in LR and mostly inclusive in EPer. The Black women coded in LR respond to news about Spain, the US, and France. We have 6 records (out of a total of 10) about Spain, all of them in the same document and about the same woman: the grandmother of a far-right leader in Catalonia. On the contrary, of the 48 inclusive records of EPer, less than a quarter (n = 11, in two documents) refer to a territorial reality other than the Spanish one; specifically, the US, for the assumption of the vice presidency of the country by Kamala Harris. This does not mean that this is the only reference to the US high office, but that it is the only time (the same can be said with respect to the rest of the newspapers and ethnocultural profiles) in which its Blackness is noted.

4.3. Valence Framing of IRW

Immigrant women are alien to Us, by their very nature, whenever the media do not portray a different image of them. On the contrary, Muslim and Black women remain indefinite (neutral frame) whenever it is not said that they are foreigners or whenever their belonging to or alienation from the autochthonous population is not made explicit. A different issue is the extent to which they are portrayed in a problematic or positive way. Table 5 shows how, while predominating the negative frame, it outperforms the positive one by barely two percentage points. The narrative is clearly positive regarding Black women. It is also mostly positive in the case of immigrant women, although in this case the presence of the three frames is more homogeneous. References to Muslim women are, on the contrary, mostly negative, despite the presence of the other two frames being observed in almost half of the coverage.
Such diversity portrays a different image of IRW depending on the media outlet and the female profile. While references to Black women are absent in EM, there is only one reference each in ABC (negative) and in EP (positive). Coverage is mostly positive in EPer and LR, and exclusively positive in LV. The media discourse regarding immigrant and Muslim women is quite different. The coverage of immigrants is mostly negative in the three conservative newspapers, while it is positive in the other three. The positive frame is superior to the neutral one in LR, although the negative one is superior to both together, while readers are exposed in EM to a discourse in which neutral (58 references) and negative (56) frames are practically equal. Thus, the racist component prevails—from more to less—in ABC, LR, and EM. Regarding Muslim women, EP is the only newspaper that mostly covers this group in neutral or positive terms (41 and 40 references, respectively). Differences are observed, however, between conservative and Catalan newspapers. While among the former, negative framing characterizes between 74% (LR) and 85% (ABC) of the references to Muslim women, in EPer it does not reach 55%, amounting to just 45% in LV.
The image portrayed of IRW does not only respond to their ethnocultural or foreign profile. In 39% of the clippings (n = 91) they appear to be performing some type of activity or engaging in a profession. It is stated in 64 documents, by intersecting with their double or triple condition of IRW, that they are workers, and sometimes their profession is specified: legal operator (3 references in 3 documents), architect (1/1), engineer (1/1), journalist (1/1), health professional (3/2), temporary worker (1/1) or, mostly, sportswoman (10/2) or a woman dedicated to culture (108/37). These are relevant records insofar as they are the occasions when IRW are portrayed as active or potentially active subjects. Besides, the media adopt a markedly positive framing then, and with a greater presence of the neutral frame than the negative one (see Table 6).
By newspapers, once again we find (a) that the Catalans and (at a great distance) LR are those that make the most allusions of this nature and in most texts, and (b) that the Catalans and EP are those that mostly adopt a positive approach. On the contrary, EM references are negative and scarce (four records in three documents), and readers find mostly negative references in LR and never positive ones in ABC, where the coverage—although scarce—is mostly neutral.
As can be seen in the last row of Table 6, in addition to the aforementioned workers and with practically the same number of records, the media address issues related to civil society activists, students, and women who are dedicated to politics in institutional terms (whether or not they hold public office), who engage in prostitution, or who are related to terrorist activities. Taking into account all IRW whose occupancy is known, the percentages of records by frame change, but the positive frame still predominates (55%), and the negative frame continues to be lower than the neutral. The negative frame predominates in none of the occupational categories reported. In the case, for example, of the IRW that practice prostitution—whether they are described as sexually exploited women or as sex workers—24 references are recorded in 11 documents, 21 of them with a positive approach. This is not because prostitution is supported, but because, instead of either criticizing the IRW that exercise it or making them a danger or a problem (negative approach, n = 2 records), what is criticized is the situation that forces them to engage in it.
Except for one occasion where Blackness is highlighted, all references to IRW engaging in prostitution pertain to immigrants. The media coverage also portrays the image of IRW students, all of them immigrants (neither Muslims nor Blacks). On the contrary, there are hardly any references to immigrants dedicated to institutional politics (n = 2, in two documents). The media translate the image of Black politicians (n = 16 records, 15 of them with a positive frame and none negative), but Muslims above all (n = 48 records, 20 with a negative frame). ABC and LV only make two references to IRW female politicians. EM and EP only make references to Muslim female politicians—mostly neutral in the case of EM (n = 5 out of 8) and positive in EP (n = 7/11). On the contrary, both LR and EPer, the newspapers that have the most records of Muslim female politicians, are also the only ones that have them mostly negative (n = 9/12 LR and n = 10/15 EPer).

4.4. IRW Voices and the Voices of Those Who Speak for/Instead of Them

Knowing about the media presence of the IRW is relevant to understand the opinion that journalism tends to establish about them. For the same reason, it is interesting to know the extent to which these women’s voices are reproduced, whether directly or indirectly, as well as the extent to which it is with their voice that the discourse is constructed, or rather through third-party voices. IRW (see Table 7) are the actors with the most records when talking about them (in each of the newspapers). The records of experts and referents and of institutions and authorities follow at a great distance, with unknown people and relatives (vox pop) barely represented. In short, when IRW are incorporated into the media discourse, it is not others who mostly speak for them. It is worth adding that the entries of IRW in direct style triple those in indirect style in all the outlets, except in EM, where their presence is smaller. In terms of newspapers, EPer and ABC are, respectively, those that allow the voice of the IRW to reach the public the most and the least, whether directly or indirectly. They are also the newspapers that give more and less space, respectively, to other actors’ voices, apart from LR and EP. They give more voice to institutions and authorities.
The same person speaking as or about IRW can respond to more than one profile. Out of the total of 284 occasions in which IRW voices are part of the press narrative, 88 are from experts or referents, 9 from institutions or authorities, and 5 from civil society (see Table 8). In terms of newspapers, IRW institutional voices only stand out in EM. In relation to the experts or referents, once again EPer and ABC appear as the media that give the IRW the most and least presence. The fact that EP offers fewer records of IRW experts or referents than the rest, except ABC, stands out. Note, in this regard, that we do not code women that are IRW, but women that whoever is exposed to the media sees portrayed as such. El Hachmi, for example, publishes opinion articles in EP, but the newspaper only says that she is a writer, thus avoiding any othering dimension. In the same vein, she herself does not always allude to her religious or migratory dimensions. Probably as an unintended consequence of avoiding being marked, EP contributes to her/their underrepresentation.
The 284 occasions in which the voice of the IRW is incorporated are concentrated in 87 clippings. This means that their voice is completely absent in about two-thirds of the 234 pieces in which newspapers talk about the IRW, even if it is collaterally, throughout a whole year. Their voice is absent, therefore, even from some of the news in which the IRW are the central person or group of coverage (n = 98). There are 47 clippings (20% of the total) in which, however, the voice of the IRW is so present that having us coded each reference would have distorted the analysis. Hence, in such documents we have made a general codification of each of them. As can be seen in Table 9, analyzing these documents and the presence of IRW voice in the headlines and highlights does allow us to observe a clear difference among the media as to the adopted frame: while the conservative newspapers only incorporate IRW voice by making them a problem or a threat (negative frame), the frame that predominates in the liberal and Catalan LV and in the progressive EPer and EP is mostly positive, with its presence being greater in the Catalans than in EP.

4.5. Presence of IRW According to the Topic of Coverage

The issues that the media address when referring to IRW also help shape public opinion about them. The thematic range is very wide, and there are even issues that are addressed in a single clipping. The most common are, on the one hand, the migratory phenomenon—with a clear protagonism by the news about shipwrecks and maritime arrivals—and Islam, with less than 10 clippings on Afro-descendants or blackness (see Table 10). On the other hand, the highest frequencies are concentrated around gender violence, socio-economic vulnerability, culture in its artistic dimension, and the denunciation of racism and/or discrimination. Except in the case of cultural news and some others (sports, women in politics, etc.), they all allude to negative realities. This does not mean that the framing is negative; namely, that IRW are problematized. In fact, we have observed the presence of the positive frame and how media coverage also includes women who suffer in certain situations and even women whose IRW characteristics become an aggravating factor for their situation.
Table 10 also shows the extent to which the relative weight of the themes varies in our whole database (n = 234) when we focus attention on the texts in which IRW are the central object of attention (n = 98). The Muslim identity of Muslim women, the gender violence IRW suffer, and their cultural or artistic dimension are the main issues in such texts. On the contrary, the migration issue is much less present in relative terms when it comes to media focusing on IRW. Table 10 offers the disaggregation of our data by outlets. Although issues already noted in the previous sections are reiterated (for example, that only three newspapers, without a common ideological pattern, incorporate Afro-descendancy in their themes), it should be noted, on the one hand, that only Catalan newspapers have published texts (with allusion to IRW) on social policies. On the other hand, we should note the scant or non-existent reporting on racism and/or discrimination by right-wing newspapers, and how this is an aspect in which those on the left also differ from LV, which devotes less attention to it.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Six newspapers publishing daily throughout a year result in a total of 2190 editions. A total of 234 pieces alluding to IRW suggests that press coverage underreports these women. This underreporting is even more significant when we consider that, though women comprise half of the foreign population and half of the Muslim population, they are the central subject in less than half of the clippings in which they are minimally mentioned. Regardless of the coverage of the migratory phenomenon, Islam, and Blackness, their feminine dimension is mediatically underrepresented in the media compared to their demographic reality. With regard to newspapers, apart from the conservative LR, those on the right offer the least coverage, in contrast to the Catalan outlets, with the largest racializable population residing in Catalonia, and the progressive EPer contributing the most to public opinion awareness about IRW.
The predominant framing about whether these women belong to Us or not is the exclusionary one. However, neutral and inclusive frames are also present in press coverage, and not all IRW are depicted in the same way in the process of shaping public opinion. Instead of appearing as a homogeneous group, they appear intersected by different identity markers, each conveying a different image of them. While all outlets tend to be exclusionary in their representation of immigrant women, only ABC and EM exclusively adopt this frame. Alongside EP, these newspapers rarely or never mention Black women. The framing is inclusive in the case of EP and neutral in the case of ABC. Black women receive neutral or inclusive treatment from the other outlets as well. LR’s coverage is limited to international news, except in the case of news that gives a positive image of the far-right party Vox. There is no inclusive coverage of Muslim women by ABC, and EM offers limited inclusivity. Interestingly, LR is unique in that it features nearly equal numbers of inclusive and exclusionary references. Perhaps the most unexpected result is the left-wing newspapers’ framing: while EP is the outlet that most clearly portrays Muslim women as members of the society in which they live, EPer, possibly due to a secularist stance, tends to engage in predominantly neutral discourse but with a higher occurrence of exclusionary references than inclusive ones.
IRW does not appear uniform regarding whether they are problematic. The framing is predominantly negative when depicting Muslim women but positive when portraying the other two identity groups. Even the estrangement that accompanies being a foreigner is not a reason for rejection, whereas Muslim women are consistently portrayed in a negative light. It is worth noting, however, that the positive framing on female Muslims exceeds 26%, and the negative portrayal of immigrants is below 33%. This highlights the lack of homogeneity in the media’s approach, emphasizing the error in making generalizations. Contrary to our previous conclusions, a clear distinction emerges at this point between right-wing newspapers and others, including LV: while the former tend to reject female immigration and female Muslim identity, even though the rejection of Muslim women is also high in Catalan newspapers, the presence of the negative frame is lower in the latter than in the former.
Foreignness, religion and phenotypic traits are not the only traits that intersect in IRW. Press coverage assigns IRW agency in less than half of the clippings in which they are mentioned. When these women’s profession or activity is specified, athletes are the predominant group, surpassed only by those dedicated to cultural arts. These occupations generally do not elicit rejection, yet they remain distant from the average citizen. Stories featuring inspiring and successful women with alternative profiles are rarely brought into the public sphere. Framing varies again, with left-wing newspapers and LV maintaining a predominantly positive perspective, while right-wing outlets tend to adopt a negative one. On their own, Catalan newspapers incorporate a higher number of allusions to active IRW. National outlets underreport on this topic to a greater extent, though their coverage differs according to their editorial stance. Furthermore, newspapers apply their ethno-cultural framing to the treatment of IRW by professional profile. Finally, it is important to note that a positive framing regarding IRW does not necessarily imply a positive overall context in which they operate. This is evident in news on prostitution or maritime rescues, where IRW usually appear as suffering women in need of protection or third-party intervention; that is, disempowered and devoid of agency. IRW are not portrayed as burdens or threats, and the framing is ultimately positive due to critical coverage of the situation they suffer and due to the demand for actions—public policies—in their favor.
IRW’s voices have a greater media presence compared to those who appear talking about them. However, citizens encounter these voices in less than a third of the media coverage. Left-leaning newspapers and LV are the ones that more frequently incorporate their voices. There remains a question, which is of interest for future research, as to whether the invisibility resulting from unmarked IRW—those who appear in the media without labels or markers allowing them to be analyzed/perceived as such and in their intersectionality—is casual or is caused either by an attempt to diminish their prominence in relation to diversity—thus conveying a homogeneous (and masculinized) image of the phenomenon of which they are a part (immigration, Islam, Blackness, but also precariousness)—or by an attempt not to mark them; that is, not to portray/stigmatize them through an identity trait. These two options could be responses to ideology as an explanatory variable. In this regard, we know that, while conservative newspapers incorporate IRW’s voice making them a problem, the prevailing frame in the left-wing newspapers is mostly positive. A third option or hypothesis trying to explain invisibility, complementary to the two mentioned options, would be related to the media’s conception of feminism.
There are conclusions and considerations that go beyond mere analysis of media coverage, and have political relevance, especially both in times of illiberal policies and speech (Zakaria 1997, 2007), and given the presence of the radical right in local, regional, and even national executives and legislatures, as well as in the European Parliament. Knowing the cartography of racialized women mapped by the media brings us closer to comprehending the autochthonous population’s expectations regarding IRW and the subsequent requirements for public policies. Our investigation has revealed that (female) sex, foreign status, (Islamic) religion, Blackness, and socioeconomic status intersect, reducing citizens’ knowledge about a human reality with which they live. Moreover, these factors influence the diverse perceptions individuals may hold about IRW based, on the one hand, on the identity marker attributed to each woman or group of women, and, on the other, on the media to which each citizen is regularly exposed to. No hypotheses have been ruled out; however, the application of framing theory and intersectionality has allowed us to refine them, thus proving to be valuable tools for gaining a deeper understanding of migrant and/or racialized women and the role of media in shaping public opinion and behavior.

Funding

This research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (grant number PID2021-122498NB-I00).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Relevant data generated during the study are offered in the tables and throughout the text.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Notes

1
Spanish State Secretariat for Migrations, available on https://extranjeros.inclusion.gob.es, (accessed on 15 October 2023).
2
See Álvarez-Monsiváis (2021) for Harris’ vice-presidential campaign.
3
See Richardson (1997) and Durán (2020) for the case of Islamophobia.
4
1st, 2nd, and 3rd waves (year 2021) of the Spanish General Media Survey.
5
Studies no. 3248 (10 May 2019) and no. 3269 (29 November 2019).
6
The lowest exclusionary-frame-percentage is offered by EP, and it is 90% of its records of immigrant women.
7
We refer to allusions that identify women, other traits aside, because of their Blackness or Afro-descendancy. ABC has one register, which is neutral, and EP another (inclusive).

References

  1. Alkhammash, Reem. 2020. Islamophobia in the UK print media: An intersectional critical discourse analysis. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research 8: 91–103. [Google Scholar]
  2. Álvarez-Monsiváis, Edrei. 2021. Interseccionalidad raza-género en las noticias digitales mexicanas sobre Kamala Harris. Convergencia 28: 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Amores, Javier J., Carlos Arcila-Calderón, and Beatriz González-de-Garay. 2020. The gendered representation of refugees using visual frames in the main Western European media. Gender Issues 37: 291–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Andersen, Nicole C., Mary Brinson, and Michael Stohl. 2012. On-screen Muslims: Media priming and consequences for public policy. Journal of Arab & Muslim Media Research 4: 203–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Anderson, Leticia. 2015. Countering Islamophobic media representations: The potential role of peace journalism. Global Media and Communication 11: 255–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ardèvol-Abreu, Alberto. 2015. Framing o teoría del encuadre en comunicación. Orígenes, desarrollo y panorama actual en España. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social 70: 423–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, and Tony McEnery. 2013a. Discourse Analysis and Media Attitudes: The Representation of Islam in the British Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  8. Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, and Tony McEnery. 2013b. Sketching Muslims: A corpus driven analysis of representations around the word ‘Muslim’ in the British press 1998–2009. Applied Linguistics 34: 255–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Barrère, María Angeles. 2016. Derecho antidiscriminatorio, interseccionalidad y categorías sistémicas: Análisis y propuestas con proyección legislativa. In Igualdad de Género y no Discriminación en Spain. Edited by MariaCaterina La Barbera and Marta Cruells (Coords.). Madrid: CEPC, pp. 455–79. [Google Scholar]
  10. Berbers, Anna, Willem Joris, Jan Boesman, Leen d’Haenens, Joyce Koeman, and Baldwin Van Gorp. 2016. The news framing of the ‘Syria fighters’ in Flanders and the Netherlands: Victims or terrorists? Ethnicities 16: 798–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2007. Razones Prácticas. Barcelona: Anagrama. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bowe, Brian J., Shahira Fahmy, and Jorg Matthes. 2015. U.S. newspapers provide nuanced picture of Islam. Newspaper Research Journal 36: 42–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Rafal Zaborowski. 2017. Voice and community in the 2015 refugee crisis: A content analysis of news coverage in eight European countries. International Communication Gazette 79: 613–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1989. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum 1: 139–67. [Google Scholar]
  15. Crenshaw, Kimberlé Williams. 1991. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review 43: 1241–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Durán, Rafael. 2020. Othering Muslims? A content analysis of the Spanish press coverage. Athens Journal of Mediterranean Studies 6: 89–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Edwards, Griffin Sims, and Stephen Rushin. 2018. The Effect of President Trump’s Election on Hate Crimes. SSRN Electronic Journal. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Entman, Robert M. 2007. Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication 57: 163–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gabrielli, Lorenzo. 2022. El espectáculo fronterizo en Melilla. Un sesgo de género. In Espectáculo de Frontera y Contranarrativas Audiovisuales. Edited by Mar Binimelis-Adell and Amarela Varela-Huerta. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 21–44. [Google Scholar]
  20. Gershon, Sarah. 2012. When race, gender, and the media intersect: Campaign news coverage of minority congresswomen. Journal of Women Politics and Policy 33: 105–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gibbons, Stephanie. 2022. Gender on the agenda: Media framing of women and women of color in the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Newspaper Research Journal 43: 102–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Grigorieff, Alexis, Christopher Roth, and Diego Ubfal. 2016. Does Information Change Attitudes towards Immigrants? Representative Evidence from Survey Experiments. IZA Discussion Paper 10419. December. Available online: https://docs.iza.org/dp10419.pdf (accessed on 18 October 2023).
  23. Gutmann, Amy. 2003. Identity in Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  24. Helbling, Marc, and Richard Traunmüller. 2020. What is Islamophobia? Disentangling citizens’ feelings toward ethnicity, religion and religiosity using a survey experiment. British Journal of Political Science 50: 811–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Isani, Mujtaba, and Daniel Silverman. 2016. Foreign policy attitudes toward Islamic actors: An experimental approach. Political Research Quarterly 69: 571–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kessel, Alisa. 2022. Rethinking rape culture: Revelations of intersectional analysis. American Political Science Review 116: 131–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Khan, Fatima, and Gabe Mythen. 2018. Culture, media and everyday practices: Unveiling and challenging Islamophobia. In Media, Crime and Racism. Edited by Monish Bhatia, Scott Poynting and Waqas Tufail. Cham: Springer, pp. 93–115. [Google Scholar]
  28. Khir-Allah, Ghufran. 2021. Framing Hijab in the European Mind. Singapur: Springer. [Google Scholar]
  29. Kteily, Nour, and Emile Bruneau. 2017. Backlash: The politics and real-world consequences of minority group dehumanization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 43: 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. La Barbera, MariaCaterina. 2017. Interseccionalidad = Intersectionality. Eunomía 12: 191–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. La Barbera, MariaCaterina, and Julia Espinosa-Fajardo. 2022. La interseccionalidad en las políticas públicas. In Género y Política. Edited by Alba Alonso and Marta Lois. Valencia: Tirant, pp. 151–68. [Google Scholar]
  32. Lind, Fabienne, and Christine E. Meltzer. 2021. Now you see me, now you don’t: Applying automated content analysis to track migrant women’s salience in German news. Feminist Media Studies 21: 923–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Liu, Shan-Jan Sarah. 2022. Gendering immigration: Media framings of the economic and cultural consequences of immigration. Feminist Media Studies 22: 965–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Major, Lesa Hatley, and Renita Coleman. 2008. The intersection of race and gender in election coverage. The Howard Journal of Communications 19: 315–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Martinez Lirola, Maria, and Katina Zammit. 2017. Disempowerment and inspiration: A multimodal discourse analysis of immigrant women in the Spanish and Australian online press. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines 8: 58–79. [Google Scholar]
  36. Mattoscio, Mara, and Megan C. MacDonald. 2018. Gender, migration, and the media. Feminist Media Studies 18: 1117–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. McAuliffe, Marie, Luisa Feline Freier, Ronald Skeldon, and Jenna Blower, eds. 2021. World Migration Report 2022. Geneva: International Organization for Migration. [Google Scholar]
  38. Nielsen, Carolyn. 2013. Wise Latina: Framing Sonia Sotomayor in the general-market and Latina/o-oriented prestige press. Howard Journal of Communications 24: 117–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Richardson, R. Conway. 1997. Islamophobia: A Challenge for us all. Report of the Runnymede. Trust Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia. London: Runnymede Trust. [Google Scholar]
  40. Roggeband, Conny, and Rens Vliegenthart. 2007. Divergent framing: The public debate on migration in the Dutch parliament and media, 1995–2004. WEP 30: 524–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Saleem, Muniba, Sara Prot, Craig A. Anderson, and Anthony F. Lemieux. 2015. Exposure to Muslims in media and support for public policies harming Muslims. Communication Research 44: 841–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Scalvini, Marco. 2016. A crisis of religious diversity: Debating integration in post-immigration Europe. Discourse & Communication 10: 614–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Scheufele, Dietram A., and Shanto Iyengar. 2014. The state of framing research. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication. Edited by Kate Kenski and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 619–32. [Google Scholar]
  44. UCIDE. 2022. Estudio Demográfico de la Población Musulmana. Explotación Estadística del Censo de Ciudadanos Musulmanes en España Referido a 31/12/2021. Madrid: Observatorio Andalusí. [Google Scholar]
  45. Utych, Stephen M. 2018. How dehumanization influences attitudes towards immigrants. Political Research Quarterly 71: 440–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1997. Racismo y Análisis Crítico de los Medios. Barcelona: Paidós. [Google Scholar]
  47. Verloo, Mieke. 2006. Multiple inequalities, intersectionality and the European Union. European Journal of Women’s Studies 13: 211–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Vyncke, Bart, and Baldwin Van Gorp. 2018. An experimental examination of the effectiveness of framing strategies to reduce mental health stigma. Journal Health Communication 23: 899–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Ward, Orlanda. 2017. Intersectionality and press coverage of political campaigns: Representations of Black, Asian, and minority ethnic female candidates at the U.K. 2010 general election. The International Journal of Press/Politics 22: 43–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Winer, Canton. 2021. The trouble with intersectional identities. Academia Letters 819: 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Zacharias, Usha, and Jane Arthurs. 2008. Race versus gender? The framing of the Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton battle. Feminist Media Studies 8: 425–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zakaria, Fareed. 1997. The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Affairs 76: 22–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zakaria, Fareed. 2007. The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. IRW presence in the media discourse, by number of words, days, documents and type of document.
Table 1. IRW presence in the media discourse, by number of words, days, documents and type of document.
Total (No.) Mean ** Abc El Mundo El País El Periódico La Razón La Vanguardia
No. % * No. % * No. % * No. %* No. % * No. % *
Documents Total 234 39 30 12.8 28 12.0 37 15.8 53 22.6 43 18.4 43 18.4
News or report 190 32 28 14.7 22 11.6 27 14.2 46 24.2 37 19.5 30 15.8
Opinion art. 23 4 1 4.3 3 13.0 5 21.7 5 21.7 3 13.0 6 26.1
Editorial 4 1 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 75.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 25.0
Interview 17 3 1 5.9 3 17.6 2 11.8 2 11.8 3 17.6 6 35.3
Words 185,347 30,891 21,120 11.4 26,526 14.3 30,264 16.3 44,012 23.7 34,325 18.5 29,100 15.7
* Row percentages, in relation to the total of each of the six newspapers. ** Arithmetic mean of the corresponding total value. Source: own elaboration.
Table 2. IRW presence as a central theme in the media discourse, by number of words, days, documents and type of document.
Table 2. IRW presence as a central theme in the media discourse, by number of words, days, documents and type of document.
Total (nº) Media ** ABC EM EP EPer LR LV
Nº % * Nº % * Nº % * Nº % * Nº % * Nº % *
Documents Total 98 16 6 6.1 9 9.2 14 14.3 22 22.4 25 25.5 22 22.4
News or report 73 12 6 8.2 7 9.6 10 13.7 16 21.9 20 27.4 14 19.2
Opinion art. 12 2 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 25.0 4 33.3 2 16.7 3 25.0
Interview 13 2 0 0.0 2 15.4 1 7.7 2 15.4 3 23.1 5 38.5
Words 77,684 12.947 4590 5.9 10,341 13.3 11,619 15.0 18,393 23.7 18,298 23.6 14,443 18.6
* Row percentages, in relation to the total of each of the six newspapers. ** Arithmetic mean of the corresponding total value. Source: own elaboration.
Table 3. Presence of the IRW in the highlights * of the press.
Table 3. Presence of the IRW in the highlights * of the press.
Documents El Periódico La Razón La Vanguardia Abc El Mundo El País
27 26 24 15 15 14
Distance to the mean (M = 20) +7 +6 +4 −5 −5 −6
* Highlights are understood to be titles, subtitles, leads, subheadings, and captions. Source: own elaboration.
Table 4. IRW’s inclusive vis-à-vis exclusionary frames, by identity marker *.
Table 4. IRW’s inclusive vis-à-vis exclusionary frames, by identity marker *.
IRW
(Total Records)		 Women of Colour or Afro-Descendent or Black Women Female Immigrants Female Muslims
Exclusionary frame 1066
(67.9%) **		 2
(1.9%)		 0.1% 678
(95.6%)		 63.6% 95
(21.5%)		 8.9%
Neutral frame 273
(17.4%)		 39
(36.8%)		 14.1% 26
(3.7%)		 9.5% 197
(44.7%)		 72.2%
Inclusive frame 230
(14.7%)		 65
(61.3%)		 24.9% 5
(0.7%)		 2.2% 149
(33.8%)		 64.8%
Total 1569 *** 106 (100%) 709 (100%) 441 (100%)
* The table collects data of encoded records. The IRW percentages by frame do not add up to 100% because there are IRW records with other type of markers (see below). ** Percentages in parentheses are by column. Percentages in individual cells are row-based, relative to the total records of the corresponding frame. *** Totals on the right do not add up to 1569 because not all records have an ethnocultural marker in the press discourse. Source: own elaboration.
Table 5. IRW’s positive vis-à-vis negative frames, by identity marker *.
Table 5. IRW’s positive vis-à-vis negative frames, by identity marker *.
IRW
(Total Records)		 Women of Colour or Afro-Descendent or Black Women Female Immigrants Female Muslims
Negative frame 581
(37.0%) **		 3
(2.8%)		 0.5% 230
(32.4%)		 39.6% 228
(51.7%)		 39.2%
Neutral frame 437
(27.9%)		 11
(10.4%)		 2.5% 186
(26.2%)		 42.6% 98
(22.2%)		 22.4%
Positive frame 551
(35.1%)		 92
(86.8%)		 16.7% 293
(41.3%)		 53.2% 115
(26.1%)		 20.9%
Total 1569 *** 106 (100%) 709 (100%) 441 (100%)
* The table collects data of encoded records. The IRW percentages by frame do not add up to 100% because there are IRW records with other types of markers (see below). ** Percentages in parentheses are by column. Percentages in individual cells are row-based, relative to the total records of the corresponding frame. *** Totals on the right do not add up to 1569 because not all records have an ethnocultural marker in the press discourse. Source: own elaboration.
Table 6. Positive vis-à-vis negative frames of IRW with a professional profile.
Table 6. Positive vis-à-vis negative frames of IRW with a professional profile.
Records *
Total Negative Frame Neutral Frame Positive Frame
ABC 6 2 33% 4 67% 0
EM 4 4 100% 0 0
LR 19 8 42% 4 21% 7 37%
LV 82 2 2% 11 13% 69 84%
EP 7 1 14% 0 6 86%
EPer 58 2 3% 8 14% 48 83%
Total (IRW workers or professionals) 176 19 11% 27 15% 130 74%
Total (IRW with reported activity) ** 384 72 19% 101 26% 211 55%
* Porcentages by row. ** It includes, along with working or professional IRW, activists, students, politicians, and IRW engaged in prostitution or involved in terrorist activities. Source: own elaboration.
Table 7. IRW voice and the voices of those who speak about them *.
Table 7. IRW voice and the voices of those who speak about them *.
Style Profile of People with Voice
IRW Experts and References Institutions and Authorities Civil Society Vox Pop
ABC Direct 2 2.7% 0 0.0% 2 4.4% 3 16.7% 1 25.0%
Indir. 6 2.9% 4 3.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 30.0%
EM Direct 13 17.3% 0 0.0% 2 4.4% 1 5.6% 2 50.0%
Indir. 26 12.4% 14 11.5% 11 16.2% 9 20.5% 1 10.0%
LR Direct 12 16.0% 4 14.8% 22 48.9% 4 22.2% 1 25.0%
Indir. 31 14.8% 14 11.5% 9 13.2% 3 6.8% 1 10.0%
LV Direct 13 17.3% 8 29.6% 4 8.9% 3 16.7% 0 0.0%
Indir. 37 17.7% 24 19.7% 8 11.8% 9 20.5% 2 20.0%
EP Direct 12 16.0% 3 11.1% 9 20.0% 1 5.6% 0 0.0%
Indir. 38 18.2% 11 9.0% 28 41.2% 10 22.7% 2 20.0%
EPer Direct 23 30.7% 12 44.4% 6 13.3% 6 33.3% 0 0.0%
Indir. 71 34.0% 55 45.1% 12 17.6% 13 29.5% 1 10.0%
Total Direct 75 27 45 18 4
Indir. 209 122 68 44 10
Total 284 149 113 62 14
* The table collects data of encoded records. Percentages are by column and relative to the total records of the corresponding style, either direct or indirect. Source: own elaboration.
Table 8. The profiles of the IRW with voice in the media *.
Table 8. The profiles of the IRW with voice in the media *.
Experts and References Authorities Civil Society
ABC 2 0 0
EM 5 5 1
LR 13 1 0
LV 22 0 0
EP 4 1 0
EPer 42 2 4
Total 88 9 5
* The table collects data of voices of IRW that are in the same records experts or references and/or authorities and/or members of civil society. Source: own elaboration.
Table 9. The frame of IRW voice on the highlights *, by newspaper *.
Table 9. The frame of IRW voice on the highlights *, by newspaper *.
Total Negative Frame Neutral Frame Positive Frame
ABC 2 2
EM 5 5
LR 16 9 1 7
LV 11 1 1 9
EP 8 2 2 4
EPer 17 1 3 13
Total 59 20 7 33
* The table collects coded registers of IRW voices (both in direct and indirect style) either on the titles, subtitles, leads, subheadings, or captions. Source: own elaboration.
Table 10. Topics on the press coverage with presence of the IRW.
Table 10. Topics on the press coverage with presence of the IRW.
Docs. (n = 234) Docs. with IRW as the Main Subject of Media Attention (n = 98) Difference
(Percentage Points)		 Coverage by Newspapers Relative to the Total of Each Topic
ABC EM EP EPer LR LV
Afro-descendancy and/or Blackness 9 4% 6 6% 2 0% 0% 0% 56% 33% 11%
Culture 21 9% 16 16% 7 5% 5% 10% 29% 24% 29%
Immigration 121 52% 35 36% −16 19% 16% 7% 17% 22% 19%
Immigrtn. (illegality/delinquency) 7 3% 2 2% −1 57% 0% 43% 0% 0% 0%
Immigrtn. (entries by sea) 68 29% 13 13% −16 28% 19% 4% 13% 22% 13%
Immgr. (asylum/refugee seeking) 16 7% 3 3% −4 6% 19% 6% 13% 31% 25%
Islam 57 24% 45 46% 22 7% 11% 18% 21% 23% 21%
Islam (problem) 41 18% 33 34% 16 2% 10% 22% 17% 29% 20%
Social policies 6 3% 1 1% −2 33% 0% 33% 17% 17% 0%
Socioeconomic vulnerability 22 9% 6 6% −3 14% 5% 9% 41% 5% 27%
Work/jobs 17 7% 4 4% −3 0% 0% 12% 41% 12% 35%
Care and domestic work 10 4% 1 1% −3 0% 0% 10% 40% 20% 30%
Women in politics 5 2% 4 4% 2 0% 0% 0% 40% 60% 0%
Gender violence 39 17% 26 27% 10 5% 13% 26% 26% 18% 13%
Integration 12 5% 9 9% 4 0% 0% 17% 25% 17% 42%
Prostitution 10 4% 1 1% −3 20% 20% 30% 20% 0% 10%
Racism and/or discrimination 17 7% 6 6% −1 0% 6% 41% 41% 0% 12%
Racism 14 6% 5 5% −1 0% 7% 43% 43% 0% 7%
Discrimination 5 2% 1 1% −1 0% 0% 40% 40% 0% 20%
Source: own elaboration.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Durán, R. Gender and Identity Intersectionality: Evidence from the Spanish Press Coverage of Migrant and/or Racialized Women. Journal. Media 2023, 4, 1079-1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia4040069

AMA Style

Durán R. Gender and Identity Intersectionality: Evidence from the Spanish Press Coverage of Migrant and/or Racialized Women. Journalism and Media. 2023; 4(4):1079-1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia4040069

Chicago/Turabian Style

Durán, Rafael. 2023. "Gender and Identity Intersectionality: Evidence from the Spanish Press Coverage of Migrant and/or Racialized Women" Journalism and Media 4, no. 4: 1079-1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia4040069

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop