Wd40 wrote: JR8 wrote:
Not really. Immigrants strongly imply the intention of more permanent settlement.
Agreed. And if taken in the EU context the assumption would be people fleeing war and/or economic migrants. I.e. skills or intention to work doesn't come into it.
Well, talking about UK in particular, from the news I have read and from hearing people talk, I have seen the word immigrant used for foreigners who are there on work permit as well. Basically anyone who is "living" in UK and non UK national is an immigrant in my opinion.
That piece is a bit of positioning, Guardian [Labour mouthpiece] vs Telegraph [Sometimes aligned w/Conservatives, though notably *not* over the EU].
See how the various UK papers lie on the political spectrum...
So each paper is publishing content aligned with the respective prejudices of their readership lol. This is why I've cautioned recently that The Guardian is perhaps the last non-tabloid that you can read online for free - but be very aware of how left-wing it is, and of all the biased allegiances that go together with that. It is *not* the view of your average Brit. That might be 1/2-way between The Times and The Telegraph, as reflected by the current UK government.
Also note that a front-page headline (like that Telegraph one) is a major 'dog-whistle' to sell papers, invariably a highly exaggerated single statement that might bear little connection to the article content behind it.
In my own mind you might have 3 strands of 'immigrants'.
1) People who come to work for a few years with no intention of staying. I'm not sure if there is a single-word handle for them... For example I might say 'I've let my flat to X, he's a French/Australian/American/etc accountant'. More an expat than someone immigrating. Point being, the lack of presumption of intention to stay.
2) 'Immigrant'. I think it might apply to a point-in-time current status, but IMO is of almost zero relevance in the longer term. I.e. if you moved to the UK intending to stay... 'He emigrated from xyz to London' applies. But unlike US/SG etc there isn't a sense of an ongoing, material or historic flow of such people. Immigrants don't arrive in the UK and remain called immigrants for long. Not if they get a passport and make at least some effort to fit in. Ghettoising and trying to impose their imported culture is perhaps one reason they might remain termed as 'immigrants' though. Esp. in front page headlines.
3) Economic migrants. This one is ripe for the papers politicising what they're called.
Labour are pro-immigration and they get most votes from it. So, The Guardian will position itself such that the UK has a 'moral duty to let the asylum seekers in'. Totally self-serving.
The Telegraph would likely play up how such economic migrants threaten the way of life of the established middle-classes. Hence the front page headline is going to be a shouty crystallisation of that.
Ain't the free press a gas