Introduction: asylum seekers in Australia and mediated empathy

Similar to the reception given to asylum seekers in most of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) nations, the public debate on the issue in Australia remains vexed and polarising. However, what distinguishes Australian policy is that despite being a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, ‘it is the only country where there is mandatory immigration detention for all unlawful noncitizens’ (Brown, 2013). Additionally, according to the Refugee Council of Australia, mandatory detention is used as more than just a risk-management tool as until recently, ‘asylum seekers arriving without authorisation were detained for the entire time it took to determine whether or not they were refugees – regardless of whether they posed any health or security risks to the community’ (Refugee Council of Australia, 2014). In terms of the political and public response, sociologist Klaus Neumann (2012) writes that there has been consensus on both sides of politics that ‘asylum seekers pose a threat to the integrity of Australia’s borders or to its social fabric, that fear of asylum seekers is legitimate, and that a policy of deterrence is an appropriate response’. In other words, there is stalemate in Australia on this issue in a political sense, and this is inextricably linked with the way stories of asylum seekers have been discursively represented.

The socio-political context of bipartisan support for mandatory detention forms the basis of resistance in many media texts that address the asylum seeker issue in Australia. Neumann adds that this policy of deterrence is occasionally questioned when the courts insist that it must not violate Australian law and when the public sporadically shows compassion for individual asylum seekers, especially children (2012). Given the absence of any political will to change policy, narratives across platforms that attempt to evoke an empathetic response in sections of the non-refugee Australian audience merit particular attention. This is not just because we need to aim for more accurate representations of asylum seekers to render them ‘human’ and relatable in the minds of ordinary Australians. As Szoreyni explains with regards to photographs of refugee children, it would be more ethical to move away from discourses of ‘humanisation’ in discussions of representation and towards alternative methods of reading images (2018).