2004
Volume 50 Number 4
  • ISSN: 1384-6930
  • E-ISSN: 1875-7286

Abstract

Samenvatting

Hoewel het aantal gedwongen ontheemde mensen wereldwijd toeneemt, worden ze vaak geconfronteerd met restrictieve migratiebeleidsmaatregelen en negatieve publieke opinies. In deze context is publieke communicatie essentieel voor de werking van vluchtelingenorganisaties. Dit artikel bediscussieert de belangrijkste bevindingen van een ‘mixed-methods’, multidimensioneel doctoraatsonderzoek over de publieke communicatiestrategieën van internationale vluchtelingenorganisaties, en doet aanbevelingen voor toekomstig onderzoek en het praktische werkveld.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2022.4.006.ONGE
2022-12-01
2023-01-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkin, C. K., & Rice, R. E. (2013). Theory and principles of public communication campaigns. In R. E.Rice & C. K.Atkin (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (4th ed., pp. 3-20). Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Avraamidou, M., & Eftychiou, E. (2021). Migrant racialization on Twitter during a border and a pandemic crisis. International Communication Gazette, 84(3), 227-251.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bergman Rosamond, A., & Gregoratti, C. (2020). Neoliberal turns in global humanitarian governance. Journal of Humanitarian Affairs, 2(3), 14-24.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Betts, A. (2009). Protection by persuasion. Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Betts, A., Loescher, G., & Milner, J. (2012). The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (2nd ed.). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bunce, M. (2019). Humanitarian communication in a post-truth world. Journal of Humanitarian Affairs, 1(1), 49-55.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cabot, H. (2016). “Refugee voices”. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 45(6), 645-672.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chouliaraki, L. (2012). Between pity and irony – paradigms of refugee representation in humanitarian discourse. In K.Moore, B.Gross & T.Threadgold (Eds.), Migrations and the Media (pp. 13-32). Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark-Kazak, C. (2009). Representing refugees in the life cycle. Journal of Refugee Studies, 22(3), 302-322.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen, S. (2001). States of denial. Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. DeTurk, S. (2020). Migrant advocacy, representation, and intersectional identities. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 50(1), 89-102.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dijkzeul, D., & Moke, M. (2005). Public communication strategies of international humanitarian organizations. International Review of the Red Cross, 87(860), 673-691.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Eberl, J. M., Meltzer, C. E., Heidenreich, T., Herrero, B., Theorin, N., Lind, F., … & Strömbäck, J. (2018). The European media discourse on immigration and its effects. Annals of the International Communication Association, 42(3), 207-223.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Falkheimer, J., & Heide, M. (2018). Strategic communication: An introduction. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fenton, N. (2010). NGOs, new media and the mainstream news. In N.Fenton (Ed.), New media, old news (pp. 153-168). Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Godin, M., & Doná, G. (2016). “Refugee voices,” new social media and politics of representation: young Congolese in the diaspora and beyond. Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 32(1), 60-71.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Green, D. (2018). Advocacy. In T.Allen, A.Macdonald & H.Radice (Eds.), Humanitarianism: A dictionary of concepts (pp. 16-29). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Harrell-Bond, B., & Voutira, E. (2007). In search of ‘invisible’ actors: Barriers to access in refugee research. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(2), 281-298.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Heide, M., von Platen, S., Simonsson, C., & Falkheimer, J. (2018). Expanding the scope of strategic communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 452-468.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ihlen, Ø., Figenschou, T. U., & Larsen, A. G. (2015). Behind the framing scenes. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(7), 822-838.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Irom, B. (2018). Virtual reality and the Syrian refugee camps. International Journal of Communication, 12, 4269-4291.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Johnson, H. L. (2011). Click to donate. Third World Quarterly, 32(6), 1015-1037.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kim, J. Y., & Kiousis, S. (2012). The role of affect in agenda building for public relations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(4), 657-676.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Khiabany, G. (2016). Refugee crisis, imperialism and pitiless wars on the poor. Media, Culture & Society, 38(5), 755-762.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Macnamara, J. R. (2016). Organizational listening. Peter Lang Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Moeller, S. D. (1999). Compassion fatigue. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Monnier, A., Boursier, A., & Seoane, A. (Eds.) (2022). Cyberhate in the context of migrations. Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Mumby, D. K. (2014). Critical theory and postmodernism. In L. L.Putnam & D. K.Mumby (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 101-126). Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Nikunen, K. (2019). Media solidarities. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Oliveira, E. (2017). The instigatory theory of NGO communication (ITNC) [Doctoral dissertation, Universidade do Minho, Minho, Portugal].
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ongenaert, D. (2019). Refugee organizations’ public communication. Conceptualising and exploring new avenues for an underdeveloped research subject. Media and Communication, 7(2), 195-206.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Ongenaert, D., & Joye, S. (2019). Selling displaced people? A multi-method study of the public communication strategies of international refugee organisations. Disasters, 43(3), 478–508.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Ongenaert, D. & Joye, S. (forthcoming). (Un)seen, (un)heard, (un)known? A quantitative content analysis of international refugee organizations’ public communication strategies for the Syrian and Central African crises (2015-2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Ongenaert, D., Joye, S. & Ihlen, Ø. (forthcoming). Beyond humanitarian imagery. Explaining international refugee organizations’ public communication strategies towards the Syrian and Central African crises.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Ongenaert, D., Joye, S., & Machin, D. (2022: ahead of print). Beyond the humanitarian savior logics? UNHCR’s public communication strategies for the Syrian and Central African crises. International Communication Gazette.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Orgad, S. (2018). Communication. In T.Allen, A.Macdonald & H.Radice (Eds.), Humanitarianism. A dictionary of concepts (pp. 68-80). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Paulmann, J. (2019). Humanitarianism and media. In J.Paulmann (Ed.), Humanitarianism & media (pp. 1-38). Berghahn Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Pimentel Walker, A. P., Sanga, N., Benson, O. G., & Yoshihama, M. (2021). Risk communication and institutional racism. Health Security, 19(S1), 89-94.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Powers, M. (2018). NGOs as newsmakers. The changing landscape of international news. Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Primdahl, N. L., Borsch, A. S., Verelst, A., Jervelund, S. S., Derluyn, I., & Skovdal, M. (2021). ‘It’s difficult to help when I am not sitting next to them’. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies, 16(1), 75-85.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pupavac, V. (2008). Refugee advocacy, traumatic representations and political disenchantment. Government and Opposition, 43(2), 270-292.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Putnam, L., & Nicotera, A. M. (2010). Communicative constitution of organization is a question. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 158-165.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Risam, R. (2018). Now you see them: Self-representation and the refugee selfie. Popular Communication, 16(1), 58-71.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Schewel, K. (2020). Understanding immobility. International Migration Review, 54(2), 328-355.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Smets, K. (2019). Media and immobility: The affective and symbolic immobility of forced migrants. European Journal of Communication, 34(6), 650-660.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Spiritus-Beerden, E., Verelst, A., Devlieger, I., Langer Primdahl, N., Botelho Guedes, F., Chiarenza, A., … & Derluyn, I. (2021). Mental health of refugees and migrants during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(12), 6354.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. UNHCR (2022). Global trends: Forced displacement in 2021. UNHCR.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Van Haelter, H., & Joye, S. (2020). Vluchtelingen in beeld. Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap, 48(2), 112-127.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Van Leuven, S., Deprez, A., Joye, S., & Ongenaert, D. (2018). How do Flemish politicians talk about migration? A study on the political framing of migration in Belgium 2016-2018. Ghent: Center for Journalism Studies (CJS).
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Vasavada, K. D. (2016). Then and now: Evolving representations of children in UNICEF photographs. Intersect: The Stanford Journal of Science, Technology and Society, 9(3), 1-26.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Wright, K. (2019). NGOs as news organizations. In H.Ornebring & H.Wasserman (Eds.), Oxford research encyclopedia of communication. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Wroe, L. E. (2018). ‘It really is about telling people who asylum seekers really are, because we are human like anybody else’: Negotiating victimhood in refugee advocacy work. Discourse & Society, 29(3), 324-343.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Yalouri, E. (2019). ‘Difficult’ representations. Visual art engaging with the refugee crisis. Visual Studies, 34(3), 223-238.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Yoo, S. C., & Drumwright, M. (2018). Nonprofit fundraising with virtual reality. Non-profit Management and Leadership, 29(1), 11-27.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Yukich, G. (2013). Constructing the model immigrant: Movement strategy and immigrant deservingness in the New Sanctuary Movement. Social Problems, 60(3), 302-320.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2022.4.006.ONGE
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TCW2022.4.006.ONGE
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error