The new integrationism, the state and Islamophobia: retreat from multiculturalism in Australia

Since their introduction to Australia in the early 1970s, the politics of multiculturalism have entailed a degree of state control over the cultural affairs of (principally immigrant) ethnic communities. This was largely obtained by consent rather than coercion, and this consent was often purchased with various forms of state resourcing for community needs, with a measure of coercion attached to the threat, where necessary, of funding withdrawals. Beyond the basic framework of liberal-democratic norms, very little of the ground rules for the acceptable practice of minority culture were inscribed in legislation or state pronouncements. The pursuit of the ‘War on Terror’ since 9/11 has increasingly seen the intrusion of the state into cultural, and especially religious, matters of minority populations, overwhelmingly among Muslims, in Australia. Pronouncements are now routinely made by political leaders of what is acceptable in a sermon, for example, and what is ‘extreme’, ‘radical’ or unacceptable. Religious leaders themselves have been identified by state actors as exemplary or beyond the pale and to be replaced. The government has involved itself in the process of selection of religious representatives, and made strong representations about the selection of leaders and their necessary attributes, such as fluency in English, attitudes favouring ‘integration’, beliefs in women's rights, positive disposition towards the alliance with the United States, and so on. There have also been government demands for ethnic/religious schools to teach ‘Australian values’. At present there is no legal basis for such prescription and proscription, which operates rather by hectoring and harassment and the implied conditionality of the remnants of multicultural funding. All of this action can be shown to be discriminatory, in that it is directed only towards Muslims. It also represents a dangerous trend in terms of undermining the right to religious freedom, enshrined in a number of international treaties to which Australia is a signatory

From noted ‘phenomenon’ to ‘missing person’: A case of the historical construction of the unter-journalist

Tim Hewat was celebrated during his tenure at Granada Television as one of the most influential journalists working in Britain in the second half of the 20th century, but then largely forgotten for 30 years.This is explained as a function of the specific historicization of journalists, reflecting both academic prejudices and occupational values. The history of journalism is largely devoid of the lived experiences of the majority of its practitioners. Hewat’s case indicates that journalists disappear from history when they step outside the domains of valorized media institutions and journalism hierarchies that contribute to notions such as the Fourth Estate. Mobilizing Paul Thompson’s category of ‘underclasses’, this article argues that this reductionism has largely rendered the majority of journalists historically invisible and classified them as unter-journalists , a kind of sub-category which does not comply with a priori norms. © The Author(s) 2010