側記 | 流動中的道德恐慌：脫歐後反移民論述的媒體、情感與波動性
2026-04-05
講者: Professor Rafał Smoczyński
時間: 2026.3.10
地點: 國立陽明交通大學
活動連結：連結
活動照片：連結
側記作者： Lan-Hanh T. Nguyen
Introduction
On March 10, 2026, the International Center for Cultural Studies at National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University hosted an academic lecture titled “Moral Panics in Motion: Media, Affect, and the Volatility of Anti-Migrant Discourse After Brexit” delivered by Professor Rafał Smoczyński. The event brought together faculty members, postdoctoral researchers, graduate students, and online participants for an engaging session that combined a formal lecture with discussant responses and open-floor discussion.
Professor Smoczyński opened the lecture by noting that his presentation draws on a forthcoming article co-authored with Ian Fitzgerald, titled “Volatile Boundaries: The Decline of Anti-Polish Migrant Moral Panic in Post-Brexit Britain” (Czech Sociological Review, 2026).
The talk forms part of an ongoing collaborative research agenda on migration, social control, and digital governance. It builds on earlier joint projects examining migration logistics and unequal citizenship, while also contributing to a broader interdisciplinary inquiry into the “chip era” and its implications for governance, surveillance, and social regulation.
Professor Smoczyński’s lecture addressed a central sociological puzzle: how anti-migrant moral panic in the United Kingdom – particularly targeting Polish and Eastern European migrants – emerged, persisted for over a decade, and then rapidly declined following the Brexit referendum. By combining empirical research with theoretical innovation, the talk offered a nuanced account of the interplay between media, politics, affect, and social control.
The lecture began by situating the case within the broader context of post-2004 European Union enlargement, which triggered a large-scale migration flow from Central and Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom. Approximately two million migrants arrived in a relatively short period, with Polish migrants forming the largest group. In public discourse, “Polish migrants” often became a proxy category representing Eastern European migrants more generally.
This influx generated significant public concern, particularly among segments of the British population experiencing economic precarity. Anxiety centered on three main issues: employment competition, pressure on welfare systems, and public safety. These concerns were especially pronounced among low-skilled workers facing unstable labor conditions, short-term contracts, and structural unemployment.
However, Professor Smoczyński emphasized that empirical research consistently contradicted many of these fears. Rather than displacing local workers, migrants often filled labor shortages in sectors such as agriculture, construction, hospitality, and logistics – jobs that were typically unattractive to the native population. Moreover, migrant labor contributed positively to the economy by reducing inflationary pressures and supporting key industries.
This discrepancy between perception and reality laid the groundwork for understanding the phenomenon as a case of moral panic.
The lecture then turned to the concept of moral panic, drawing on classical sociological frameworks. Moral panic refers to a heightened collective reaction to a perceived threat against societal values and norms. Such reactions typically involve the construction of “folk devils” – figures portrayed as dangerous outsiders responsible for social problems.
In this case, Polish migrants were cast as folk devils accused of stealing jobs, exploiting welfare systems, and undermining social cohesion. A key feature of moral panic is disproportionality: the perceived threat is exaggerated relative to actual conditions. Despite evidence of migrants’ economic contributions, anti-migrant narratives persisted and gained traction.
Another defining characteristic of moral panic is volatility, which is its tendency to rise rapidly and then dissipate. Yet, as Professor Smoczyński noted, the anti-Polish panic in Britain lasted for over a decade, challenging conventional models. This anomaly prompted the need for a revised theoretical framework.
To address this complexity, the speaker proposed an integrative theoretical approach combining neo-Durkheimian sociology with insights from political theory and discourse analysis.
From a neo-Durkheimian perspective, moral panic is understood as a form of collective emotional response rooted in shared moral sentiments. Societies define themselves through distinctions between what is considered “good” and “bad,” and moral panic emerges when perceived threats disrupt this normative order.
Building on this, the lecture emphasized the importance of naming and affect. Social actors and institutions identify both valued norms and their supposed threats, attaching emotional significance to these categories. Through this process, communities are mobilized around shared fears and moral judgments.
A crucial role in this process is played by what Louis Althusser termed “ideological state apparatuses,” particularly media and political institutions. These actors shape public discourse, produce narratives, and assign roles to social subjects. In the context of Brexit-era Britain, they were instrumental in constructing migrants as threats and sustaining the emotional intensity of moral panic.
The study presented in the lecture employed a mixed qualitative methodology combining interviews and media analysis.
First, 35 semi-structured interviews were conducted with Polish migrants residing in northern England. The sample included individuals across a range of occupations, from low-skilled laborers to professionals, allowing for a diverse set of perspectives.
Second, the research analyzed over 1,000 newspaper articles from major British outlets, including tabloids and broadsheets. The analysis compared two periods: pre-referendum (2010–June 2016) and post-referendum (June 2016–March 2022). This approach enabled the researcher to trace shifts in media representation and public discourse over time.
The findings revealed a clear pattern in the media attention cycle. Before the Brexit referendum, coverage of Polish migrants was extensive and often alarmist. A total of 1,325 articles appeared during this period, many of which emphasized themes of job theft, welfare dependency, and criminal behavior. Tabloid newspapers in particular played a significant role in amplifying these narratives.
After the referendum, however, media attention declined sharply. Only 356 articles were published in the subsequent period – a reduction of approximately 73%. Moreover, the tone of coverage shifted. Instead of portraying migrants as threats, media discourse increasingly focused on labor shortages and the consequences of migrant departures.
This transformation marked the collapse of anti-Polish moral panic in mainstream discourse.
Interview data supported this conclusion. Respondents reported a noticeable decrease in xenophobic rhetoric and everyday hostility. Sensationalist stories – such as claims that migrants engaged in bizarre or criminal behaviors – disappeared from public circulation. Migrants also perceived a reduction in discrimination in daily life.
Explaining the Collapse
A key argument of the lecture is that the decline of moral panic was not driven by structural changes in the labor market. In fact, many of the underlying economic conditions remained unchanged. Labor shortages persisted, and there was little evidence that Brexit improved employment opportunities for British workers.
Instead, the collapse of moral panic was attributed to institutional dynamics. As media outlets reduced their coverage and political actors shifted their focus, the emotional energy sustaining the panic dissipated. Issues such as the COVID-19 pandemic, economic recovery, and new geopolitical concerns displaced migration from the center of public debate.
This process was described as “affective exhaustion.” While underlying anxieties and prejudices did not disappear, they lost their capacity to mobilize collective outrage in the absence of institutional reinforcement.
Importantly, the lecture did not suggest that xenophobia vanished entirely. Rather, it became diffused and relocated. Anti-migrant sentiments continued to circulate in informal settings, particularly on social media platforms and in private conversations.
However, without the legitimizing force of mainstream media and political discourse, these sentiments no longer constituted a coordinated moral panic. They were perceived by migrants as sporadic and less threatening, lacking the institutional backing that had previously amplified their impact.
This distinction underscores the importance of institutional “scaffolding” in transforming individual prejudice into collective action.
Another significant dimension of the study concerns migrant agency. During the height of moral panic, Polish migrants were subjected to stigmatization, workplace exploitation, and legal insecurity. Many experienced a sense of vulnerability and exclusion.
Over time, however, migrants developed strategies of adaptation and self-empowerment. These included professional upskilling, entrepreneurship, increased civic participation, and the pursuit of legal stability through residency or citizenship.
As a result, migrant subjectivity underwent a transformation. Instead of being framed as deviant outsiders, migrants increasingly identified themselves – and were sometimes recognized – as reliable workers and contributors to society. This shift illustrates the dynamic interplay between discourse, identity, and agency.
The following table summarizes the findings of Professor Smoczyński’s research:
The lecture was followed by responses from two discussants, who highlighted key contributions and raised critical questions.
The first discussant – Dr. Lungani Lhongwa of ICCS, who works on digital surveillance and China in Africa – characterized the case as a “sociological mystery,” emphasizing the rapid emergence and disappearance of public outrage. He underscored the central role of media and political institutions in shaping narratives and pointed to the importance of migrant agency. He also raised questions about the role of social media and algorithmic systems in contemporary forms of moral panic.
The second discussant – Dr. Dolma Tsering of ICCS, who works on Tibetan refugees in India and Taiwan – connected the analysis to global contexts, including anti-immigrant discourse in the United States (e.g., Somalis in Minnesota). She questioned how moral panic operates in digital environments and introduced the concept of “progressive moral panic,” where moral mobilization may serve emancipatory or solidaristic purposes. She also touched upon media exhaustion's lingering stereotypes and the targeting of marginalized groups.
The open discussion further explored these themes, including comparisons with migration debates in Poland and the role of misinformation and disinformation in amplifying social anxieties.
Audience inputs: Professor Joyce Liu suggested going beyond the perspectives of migrants and interviewing ultra right citizens of the UK who opposed migrants. Kasia – SRCS doctoral candidate working on disinformation in Poland – connected the moral panic analyzed in Britain with Ukrainian immigrants in Poland (no full panic sans mainstream politics), fake news/algorithms and crime correlations.
Professor Smoczyński stressed political agency necessity, mainstream media's role over social media, empirical hurdles in studying xenophobes, and non-empirical ideology critique (e.g., Ukraine no panic despite crime data due to geopolitics). He affirmed progressive panics but doubted without conservative fright; noted emerging Georgian panic in Poland.
Others raised layered anti-migrant structures (Germany, New Zealand), conspiracy in media engineering, French riots. Debate circled political engineering (Hall/Thatcher), distinguishing irrational panic from reflection.
Professor Smoczyński’s lecture offers a compelling rethinking of moral panic in contemporary societies. By integrating empirical research with theoretical innovation, it demonstrates that moral panic is not merely a spontaneous reaction but a structured, institutionally mediated process driven by affect and discourse.
The case of anti-Polish sentiment in post-Brexit Britain reveals that moral panics can persist longer than expected but may also collapse rapidly when institutional support is withdrawn. Crucially, such decline does not necessarily reflect the resolution of underlying social problems but rather a shift in the organization of attention and emotional investment.
The lecture also highlights the continuing relevance of traditional media and political actors in shaping public perception, even in an era of digital fragmentation. At the same time, it points to the need for further research on the role of social media in sustaining or transforming moral panics.
Overall, the event provided valuable insights into the dynamics of migration, media, and social control, contributing to ongoing debates in sociology, political theory, and cultural studies. It underscored moral panics' relevance to contemporary populism, neoliberalism, and AI governance. It is linked to ongoing NYCU projects on chip-era surveillance and digital platforms, emphasizing social control over migrants.
The session ended with thanks and promotion of a follow-up lecture by Professor Ranabir Samaddar on refugees. Attendees praised the rigorous, interdisciplinary exchange.
近期新聞 Recent News
