Diversity Discourses

As globalization progresses, Germany and many other European countries are experiencing a continuous increase in ethnic and cultural diversity. International research has shown that culturally heterogeneous societies are more successful when they succeed in ensuring social cohesion and in exploiting the existing potential of diversity, for example through better access to and more in-depth processing of information (?erban et al., 2020). This idea of a common overarching identity is also embedded in the European vision and legal regulations. At the same time, Europe faces the challenge of finding ways to deal effectively with prejudice, competence deficits and discrimination (Genkova & Riecken, 2020).

In Germany, there is still widespread concern about immigration and efforts to reduce disadvantages as well as to integrate and include migrants. In representative studies on attitudes towards immigration, one third of respondents without a migration background expressed explicitly xenophobic views and a "fear of foreign infiltration" (KONID Survey, 2019). Similar results were found in the representative Leipzig Authoritarianism Study and the Panel on Group-Related Misanthropy (Decker et al., 2022; Heitmeyer, 2010; Küpper & Zick, 2017). The prevalence of moderately to strongly xenophobic and racist attitudes is partly reflected in the public discourse on migration and equal opportunities. Numerous analyses have shown the prevalence and speakability of culturalist, problem-centered and deficit-oriented constructions of migration in traditional and social media. Actors in public debates operate from very different backgrounds, what complicates a shared classification and reflection (Bauder, 2008; Butterwegge, 2009; Goebel, 2021; Goebel & Vischer, 2023)

Researchers in the field of migration are challenged to provide evidence-based contributions to these emotional, unobjective, and sometimes openly hostile social debates. In doing so, they are exposed to a disproportionate amount of hostility, criticism and open threats (Treibel, 2018). Another key difficulty is the heterogeneity of the target groups of academic discourse contributions in terms of knowledge, experience and attitudes. The public debate on migration and equal opportunities can be described as a post-normal challenge for science communication (cf. Akin & Scheufele, 2017), because the contextual conditions are complex and difficult to understand for the target groups. Due to different life worlds, even benevolent listeners often do not understand the meaning of scientific contributions on the topic of migration (Schmid-Petri & Bürger, 2019). The different positions carry high subjective risks, such as the fear of "foreign infiltration" versus the systematic discrimination of social groups.

However, academic articles on migration discourses are currently rarely adapted to the respective recipients (Goebel, 2021a). Contributions that are intended to educate, such as interviews or talk shows, usually only influence those who already have a positive attitude or are interested in the topic. Other important groups are either not reached or their attitudes do not change if the new information contradicts their previous views. In such cases, complex facts and different points of view can lead people to react negatively and reinforce their negative opinions instead of changing them (Genkova & Schreiber, 2022). Even discursive and participatory formats that include the perspectives of migrants, for example, are often inadequate because they are not sufficiently adapted to the knowledge and life experiences of the viewers.