Nefret Söylemi Üzerinden Ötekileştirme: Twitter’da Mültecilere Yönelik Nefret Tipolojisi Analizi

Year 2021, Issue: 36, 501 - 520, 31.12.2021

Özlem Alikılıç , Ebru Gökaliler , İnanç Alikılıç

https://doi.org/10.31123/akil.989074

Cited By: 5

Abstract

2010 yılından bu yana Suriye’de yaşanan iç savaş nedeniyle ülkelerinden göç eden halk için Türkiye önemli bir göç merkezi haline gelirken, yaşanan bu kaos ve mülteci krizi sonucunda Avrupa ülkelerinde ve Türkiye’de mülteci sorunu nefret söyleminin merkezine yerleşmiştir. Mülteciler ve yaşadıkları sorunlarla ilgili çevrimiçi ortamlarda üretilen içerikler, kullanılan dil mültecilere yönelik oluşan nefret söyleminin daha güçlenmesine sebep olmaktadır. Çalışmada Türkiye’de Suriyelilerle ilgili çevrimiçi paylaşımların nefret unsurları taşıyıp taşımadığı, ayrımcı söylem stratejileri temelinde sınıflandırılarak araştırılmıştır. Türkiye’deki Twitter kullanıcılarının Türkçe içerikleri üzerinden gerçekleştirilen bu araştırmada, #suriyeli”, “#mülteci”, “#suriyelimülteci”, “#suriyelileriistemiyoruz” ve “#suriyelilerdefolsun” hashtaglerinin altına yapılan 4.217 adet tweet incelenmiş ve mültecilere geliştirilen söylemlerin daha çok hangi ayrımcı söylem stratejileri tipolojileri altında toplandığı keşfedilmeye çalışılmıştır. Çalışmada olumsuz söylemlerin ötekileştirici ve kışkırtıcı bir arka planı olduğu, Twitter kullanıcılarının söylemlerinin sertleşip hakaret boyutuna vardığı, mültecilere yönelik nefret ve düşmanlık söylemlerinin kolektif olarak kamusal eleştiriler çerçevesinde toplandığını söylemek mümkündür.

Keywords

Ötekileştirme, Nefret Söylemi, Twitter, Suriyeli Mülteciler

References

• Akşak, E. Ö. (2020). Discursive Construction of Syrian Refugees in Shaping International Public Opinion: Turkey’s Public Diplomacy Efforts. Discourse & Communication 2020, Vol. 14(3), 294–313.
• Aslan, A. (2017). Online Hate Discourse: A Study on Hatred Speech Directed Against Syrian Refugees on Youtube. Journal of Media Critiques, 221-256.
• Barros, M. (2014). Tools of Legitimacy: The Case of the Petrobras Corporation Blog. Organizational Studies 35(8): 1211–1230.
• Bar-Tal, D., Kruglanski, A. ve Klar, Y. (1989). Delegitimization: The Extreme Case of Stereotyping and Prejudice. (Ed.) Bar-Tal D, Graumann C, Kruglanski A, vd. Stereotyping and Prejudice: Changing Conceptions. New York: Springer, 169–182.
• Bernstein, B. (1990). The Social Construction of Pedagogic Discourse: Vol. IV. Class, Codes and Control. London, UK: Routledge.
• Bennett, S. (2015). Constructions of Migrant Integration in British Public Discourse. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). University of Adam Mickiewicz in Poznan, Poznan, Poland.
• Baxter L. A. ve Babbie E. (2003). The Basics of Communication Research. Wadsworth, USA.
• Blumer, H. (1958). Race Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position. The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Spring, 1958): 3-7 Published by: University of California Press.
• Bhatia, A. ve Jenks, C. J. (2018). Fabricating the American Dream in US Media Portrayals of Syrian Refugees: A Discourse Analytical Study. Discourse & Communication 12 (3), 221-239.
• Björn, R., Rist, M. ve Carbonell, G. (2016). Measuring the Reliability of Hate Speech Annotations. The Case of the European Refugee Crisis. NLP4CMC III: 3.rd Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Computer-Mediated Communication, September 2016.
• Chen, M. ve Flowerdew, J. (2019). Discriminatory Discursive Strategies in Online Comments on Youtube Videos on the Hong Kong Umbrella Movement by Mainland and Hong Kong Chinese. Discourse & Society, 30(6), 549–572.
• Contrada, Richard J., Ashmore Richard D., Gary, Melvin L., Coups, Elliot, Egeth Jill D., Sewell, A. (2001). Measures of Ethnicity-Related Stress: Psychometric Properties Ethnic Group Differences, And Associations with Well-Being. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 775-1820.
• Fairclough, N. (2001). Critical Discourse Analysis as a Method in Social Scientific Research. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. 5(11), 121-138.
• Flowerdew J., Li, David C.S. ve Tran S. (2002). Discriminatory News Discourse. Some Hong Kong Data, Discourse & Society. 13(3), 319–345. FRA. (2016). Current Migration Situation in the EU: Hate Crime. Yayın Tarihi: November 2016, https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2016-november-monthly-focus-hate-crime_en.pdf.
• Gee, J. P. (1999). Critical Issues: Reading and the New Literacy Studies: Reframing the National Academy of Sciences Report on Reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 31(3), 355-374.
• Georgiou, M. ve Zaborowski, R. (2017). Media Coverage of the Refugee Crisis: A Cross-European Perspective. Council of Europe.
• Gorodzeisky, A. ve Semyonov, M. (2019). Unwelcome Immigrants: Sources of Opposition to Different Immigrant Groups Among Europeans. Frontiers in Sociology, 4(24).
• Gruber, H. (1997). The Rhetoric of Trivialization: The Coverage of Right Wing Extremism and Neonazism in Austria’s Most Read Tabloid.” Belgian Journal of Linguistics 11, 139–156.
• Halliday, M. A. K ve, Hasan, R. (1989). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. USA: Oxford University Press.
• Henry, F. ve Tator, C. (2002). Discourses of Domination: Racial Bias in the Canadian English-Language Press. University of Toronto Press.
• Hatipoğlu, E., Gökçe, O. Z., Dinçer, B. ve Saygın, Y. (2016). Sosyal Medya ve Türk Dış Politikası: Kobani Tweetleri Üzerinden Türk Dış Politikası Algısı. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 13(5), 175-197.
• Hymes, D. (1972). Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Life. In Gumperz, J. J. & Hymes, D. (Ed.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, New York: Holts Rinehart &Winston: 35-71.
• Haynes, A., Devereux, E. ve Breen, M. (2004). A Cosy Consensus on Deviant Discourse: How the Refugee and Asylum Seeker Meta-narrative Has Endorsed an Interpretive Crisis in Relation to the Transnational Politics of the World’s Displaced Persons. Limerick, Ireland: University of Limerick. Department of Sociology Working Paper Series.
• Kalav, A., Certel F. ve Aliye B. (2017). Amerikan Sosyal Medyasında Göçmen Karşıtlığı Ve Dijital Nefret Söylemi: Twitter Özelinde Bir İnceleme. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 22 (15), 2209-2222.
• Kirschenbaum, A. (2004). Generic Sources of Disaster Communities: A Social Network Approach. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 24(10/11), 94-129.
• Kreis, R. (2017). # refugeesnotwelcome: Anti-refugee discourse on Twitter." Discourse & Communication 11(5), 498-514.
• Krippendorff, K. (2011). Agreement and Information in the Reliability of Coding. Communication Methods and Measures, 5(2), 93-112.
• Krzyzanowski, M. (2010). The Discursive Construction of European Identities. A Multi-Level Approach to Discourse And Identity in the Transforming European Union. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang.
• Kural, S. (2013). Gezi Parkı Olayları Twitter Kullanıcı Sayısını Patlattı (Mı?). Erişim Tarihi:11.08.2020, https://sosyalmedya.co/gezi-olaylari-twitter-kullanici-sayisi/.
• Kuş, O. (2016). Dijital Nefret Söylemini Anlamak: Suriyeli Mülteci Krizi Örnek Olayı Bağlamında BBC World Service Facebook Sayfasına Gelen Yorumların Metin Madenciliği Tekniği ile Analizi. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2016(I), 97-121.
• Luke, A. (1995). Text and Discourse in Education: An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis.” Review of Research in Education, 21(1), 3-48.
• Media Watch On Hate Speech Report. (2019). Hırant Dink Foundation, May-August 2019, Erişim Tarihi: 15.09.2020. https://hrantdink.org/attachments/article/2156/EN-may%C4%B1s-agustos-20199.pdf.
• Mihajlova, E., Bacovska, J. Ve Shekerdjıev, T. (2013). Freedom of Expression and Hate Speech. OSCE, Mission to Skopje, Skopje: Polyesterday.
• Mitchell, A ve Hitlin, P. (2013). Twitter Reaction to Events often at Odds with Overall Public Opinion. Erişim Tarihi: 10 Aralık 2019, http://www.pewresearch.org/ 2013/03/04/Twitter-reaction-to-events-often-at-odds-with-overall-public-opinion/.
• Parekh, Bhikhu. (2006). Hate Speech: Is There a Case for Banning” Public Policy Research, December 2005–February 2006, 12(4), 213-223.
• Rettberg, J. W. ve Radhika G. (2016). Terrorists or Cowards: Negative Portrayals of Male Syrian Refugees in Social Media. Feminist Media Studies. 16(1), 178-181.
• Phinney, Jean S. (1996). When We Talk About American Ethnic Groups, What Do We Mean?. American Psychologist, 51, 918-928.
• Quillian, L. (1995). Prejudice as a Response to Perceived Group Threat: Population Composition and Anti-immigrant and Racial Prejudice in Europe. Am. Sociol. Rev. 60, 586–611.
• Randolph, K. C. (2017). Executive Order 13769 and America's Longstanding Practice of Institutionalized Racial Discrimination towards Refugees and Asylum Seekers. Stetson L. Rev., 47, 1.
• Refugees Reporting. (2017). A Project of the World Association for Christian Communication - Europe Region and the Churches’ Commission for Migrants in Europe, (2017). Changing The Narrative: Media Representation Of Refugees And Migrants In Europe, CCME and WACC Europe November 2017. Erişim Tarihi: 25 Mayıs, 2019.https://www.refugeesreporting.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Changing_the_Narrative_Media_Representation_of_Refugees_and_Migrants_in_Europe.pdf.
• Reisigl, M. ve Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and Discrimination. London, UK: Routledge. Richardson, J. E. ve Wodak, R. (2009). Recontextualising Fascist Ideologies of the Past: Right-Wing Discourses on Employment and Nativism in Austria and the UK. Critical Discourse Studies, 6 (4), 251–267.
• Sayımer, İ., Derman, M. (2017). Syrian Refugees as Victims of Fear and Danger Discourse in Social Media: A Youtube Analysis. Global Media Journal TR Edition, 8(15), 384-403.
• Searle, J. R. (1985). Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press. Semyonov, M., Raijman, R., ve Gorodzeisky, A. (2006). The Rise of Anti-Foreigner Sentiment in European Societies: 1988-2000. Am. Sociol. Rev, 71, 426–449.
• Soral, W., Bilewicz, M. ve Winiewski, M. (2018). Exposure to Hate Speech Increases Prejudice Through Desensitization. Aggressive Behavior, 44(2), 136–146.
• Sulaiman-Hill, C.M. R., Sandra, C., Thompson, R. A. ve Toshi, L. H. (2011). Changing Images of Refugees: A Comparative Analysis of Australian and New Zealand Print Media 1998−2008. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 9(4), 345-366.
• Syam, A. (2019). Patchwork of Archaic of Archaic Regulations and Policies in India: A Breeding Ground for Discriminatory Practice Against Refugees. Erişim Tarihi: 25 Eylül 2020, https://nyujilp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/NYI411.pdf, 1377-1389.
• Telhami, S. (2016). American Attitudes on Refugees from the Middle East. The Brookings Institution, Erişim tarihi: 25 Eylül 2020, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/American-attitudes-on-refugees-from-the-Middle-East-MASTER.pdf.
• Twitter (2019). Search Tweets. Erişim Tarihi:5 Ocak, 2019, https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/tweets/search/api-reference/get-search-tweets.
• Warner, W. ve Hirschberg, J. (2012). Detecting hate speech on the world wide web. ”The second workshop on language in social media” bildiri kitabı içinde (ss. 19-26).
• Weiss, G. ve Wodak, R. (2003). Introduction: Theory, Interdisciplinarity and Critical Discourse Analysis.” In Critical Discourse Analysis ( 1-32). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations, Trans. GEM Anscombe, 261, 49.
• Wodak, R. (2015). Discrimination via Discourse.” In Bonvillain. 366–383, Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology. London: Routledge.
• Wodak, R. ve Fairclough, N. (2010). Recontextualizing European Higher Education Policies: The cases of Austria and Romania. Critical Discourse Studies 7(1), 19–40.
• Van Leeuwen, T. ve Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing Immigration Control: A Discourse-historical Analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2003). Critical Discourse Analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Ed), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis , (ss 352-371). Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2011). Discourse and Ideology. T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.) Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction (ss.379–407). London: SAGE.
• Yıldırım A. ve Şimşek H. (2000). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (2.Baskı). Seçkin Yayınları.
• Voynova, S., Gabova, S., Lozanova, D. ve Lomeva, S. (2017). “Legal Framework, Social Responses and Good. Practices to Counter Online Hate Speech Agaınst Migrants And Refugees, Comparative Report, Coalition of Positive Messengers to Counter Online Hate Speech, (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Romania, UK) Project reference number: JUST/2015/PRAC/AG/BEST/8931, Sofia.