This article analyses the mainstream press coverage of the terror in Norway post 22.07.2011 and discusses how and in what context the concepts of freedom of expression and multiculturalism occur. The aim has been to map important discursive trends in the aftermath of the terror. A clear division between different victim positions is identified. One blames majority society for not granting enough space to extreme right wing views on Islam and diversity/ multiculturalism; another one sees the terror connected to a majority society that already has demonstrated a high degree of hostility towards migrants and Muslims. Thus, two different understandings of the status for freedom of expression in Norway occur, linked to differing positions on the diversity society. Keywords Multiculturalism • terrorism • freedom of expression journalism • opinion

The ‘refugee crisis’ refers to the on-going movement of people crossing into Europe, in which over 3,692 migrants and refugees died in 2015. A key point in this ‘crisis’ was the publishing of photographs of one of the young children who died. Despite the death toll, representations and the resulting treatment of refugees in Europe remained ambivalent. This paper compares the representation of the ‘crisis’ across three countries (The UK, Norway and Australia) before and after the publishing of the photographs from one major broadcaster in each country using discourse analysis. It is shown that the photographs led to a more sympathetic portrayal of refugees resulting in the ‘crisis’ shifting from a ‘migrant’ to a ‘refugee crisis’. This analysis demonstrates the importance of the ways in which refugees are presented as well as the benefits of a comparative and interdisciplinary approach to discourse analysis.

No abstract

Although Scandinavian countries are similar in many respects and have maintained common policies in several areas, they differ in their immigration policies. Swedish immigration policies have tended to be liberal, Denmark's strict, and Norway's somewhere in between. In 2015, however, all Scandina vian countries implemented border controls because of unexpectedly high migration.This article aims to explore how border control is legitimised and portrayed in Scandinavian news media through the three main discourses: sustainability, humanitarianism and defence against threat. The article argues that political actors use notions of welfare state sustainability and solidarity to justify border control. As the system is allegedly collapsing, securitisation of the border becomes an overarching premise for sustaining international obligations such as providing shelter for refugees. Border control is thus portrayed as compassionate, rather than exclusionary, policy.

No abstract