D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 TEMATSKI SKLOP / THEMATIC SEC TION MIGRACIJE DELOVNE SILE V UKRAJINI IN NA OBMOČJU NEKDANJE SOVJETSKE ZVEZE L A B O R M I G R AT I O N I N U K R A I N E A N D T H E P O S T - S O V I E T S PAC E Z h a n n a B o l a t I ntroduc t ion: Labor M igrat ion in Uk raine and the Post-Soviet Space Te t i a n a M a r u s i a k , O k s a n a K hy m ov yc h , Vo l o d y my r H o b l y k , Va s y l P i g o s h , U l i a n a Ro s o l a M igrat ion Abroad as a Socia l Consequence of Transformations of the I nst i tute of Educat ion in Modern Uk raine A k m a n a t A b u ova , N u r l a n B a i g a by l ov, M u k h t a r A b d i ka k i m ov, S a l t a n a t A u b a k i r ova , G u l n a r A s s y l k h a n ova Socia l -Economic I ntegrat ion of K azak h M igrants in Turkey Z hu l d y z I m a s h e va Explor ing Ethnic Entrepreneurship: Family Business of Taj ik M igrants O l e g Ya r o s h e n ko, Vo l o d y my r H a ra s h c h u k , O l e n a M o s ka l e n ko, G a l i n a Ya kov l e va , Vi t a l i i Sv i t l yc h ny i A Comparat ive Analys is of Forced M igrants’ R ights Abroad and in Uk raine and Control O ver Their Obser vance Under Condit ions of Mar t ia l Law A i g e r i m Ad i l g a z i n ova , Lya i l ya B a l a ka ye va , M a ra G u b a i d u l l i n a M igrant Issues in Contemporar y Japan G u l s a ra Ka p p a s s ova , M e i ra m g u l A l t y b a s s a r ova , G a n i Ye l m u ra t ov, M a d i n a Ra k h i m b a e va , B o r i s Po l o m a r c h u k M igrat ion Processes in the Republ ic of K azak hstan: Regular i t ies, Problems, and Prospec ts ČL ANKI / ARTICLES Lo r e d a n a Pa n a r i t i A H istor ical Analys is of Lef t-Wing Trade Union Posit ions Regarding Bangladeshi Workers in Monfalcone ( I ta ly) and Bosnian Workers in S lovenia V l a d i m i r I ve t a , M a r i j e t a Ra j kov i ć I ve t a M igrat ions, C i t izenships, and the R ight and Choice to Play for a Nat ional Footbal l Team with a Focus on the Croat ian Nat ional Team M a r j e t a Vr b i n c, D o n n a M . T. C r. Fa r i n a , A l e n ka Vr b i n c Or is s lovar jev in pr i ročnikov za učenje angleščine s lovensk ih izsel jencev v ZDA v obdobju 1895–1919 Ro k S m r d e l j Communicat ion Relat ions on Twitter Dur ing the M igrant “Cr is is” in S lovenia Ka t j a Ko b o l t Postmigraci jsk a estet ik a : Avtof ikc i jsko narat ivno delovanje v pisanju Di jane M atković in v izualnem ust var janju Anne Ehrenstein 592 0 2 4 9 7 7 0 3 5 3 6 7 7 0 1 3 ISSN 0353-6777 ISSN 1581-1212 59 2 0 2 4 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 DD 59 ovitek final hrbet 15 roza pastel.indd 1-3 6. 02. 2024 13:29:31 Glavni urednici / Editors-in-Chief Kristina Toplak, Marijanca Ajša Vižintin Odgovorna urednica / Editor-in-Charge Marina Lukšič Hacin Tehnični urednik / Technical Editor Tadej Turnšek Mednarodni uredniški odbor / International Editorial Board Synnove Bendixsen, Ulf Brunnbauer, Aleš Bučar Ručman, Martin Butler, Daniela l. Caglioti, Jasna Čapo, Donna Gabaccia, Jure Gombač, Ketil Fred Hansen, Damir Josipovič, Aleksej Kalc, Jernej Mlekuž, Claudia Morsut, Ikhlas Nouh Osman, Nils Olav Østrem, Lydia Potts, Maya Povrzanović Frykman, Francesco Della Puppa, Jaka Repič, Rudi Rizman, Matteo Sanfilippo, Annemarie Steidl, Urška Strle, Adam Walaszek, Rolf Wörsdörfer, Simona Zavratnik, Janja Žitnik Serafin Lektoriranje in korektura / Copyediting and proofreading Jana Renée Wilcoxen (angleški jezik / English) Tadej Turnšek (slovenski jezik / Slovenian) Oblikovanje / Design Anja Žabkar Prelom / Typesetting Inadvertising d. o. o. Založila / Published by ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC Izdal / Issued by ZRC SAZU, Inštitut za slovensko izseljenstvo in migracije / ZRC SAZU, Slovenian Migration Institute, Založba ZRC Tisk / Printed by Tisk Žnidarič, d. o. o. Naklada / Printum 150 Naslov uredništva / Editorial Office Address INŠTITUT ZA SLOVENSKO IZSELJENSTVO IN MIGRACIJE ZRC SAZU p. p. 306, SI-1001 Ljubljana, Slovenija Tel.: +386 (0)1 4706 485; Fax +386 (0)1 4257 802 E-naslov: dd-th@zrc-sazu.si Spletna stran / Website: https://ojs.zrc-sazu.si/twohomelands Revija izhaja s pomočjo Javne agencije za znanstvenoraziskovalno in inovacijsko dejavnost Republike Slovenije in Urada Vlade Republike Slovenije za Slovence v zamejstvu in po svetu / Financial support: Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency and Government Office for Slovenians Abroad ISSN 0353-6777 ISSN 1581-1212 DD 59 ovitek final hrbet 15 roza pastel.indd 4-6 6. 02. 2024 13:29:31 203 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 3 9 8 6 / 2 0 2 4 . 1 . 1 1 I PhD in sociology of culture; University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Sociology, Ljubljana; rok.smrdelj@ff.uni-lj.si; ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2259-2775 @language: sl, en @trans-language: sl, en @publisher-id: id @doi: 10.3986/2024.1.11 @article-type: 1.01 @article-category: S 265 @pages: 203–224 @history-received: 20. 3. 2023 @history-accepted: 19. 6. 2023 * * * Ž u r n a l m e t a * * * @issue: 59 @volume: 2024 @pub-year: 2024 @pub-date: 15. 2. 2024 * * * O p r e m a * * * @avtorji: Rok Smrdelj @running-header: Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia COMMUNICATION RELATIONS ON TWITTER DURING THE MIGRANT “CRISIS” IN SLOVENIA Rok SmrdeljI COBISS: 1.01 ABSTRACT Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia The article explores communication relations on Twitter during the 2015–2016 migrant “crisis” in Slovenia. By integrating social network analysis with critical discourse studies, the author finds that the “left-wing” political network had the most members. In contrast, the “right-wing” political network was notably more influential and active. The political elite, mass media, journalists, and public figures are among the most influential users. A vast majority of posts feature discriminatory discourse focused on security understandings of migration. The research is important because it provides one of the few and relatively comprehensive insights into the online digital discussion on migration in Slovenia. KEYWORDS: migrant “crisis”, Twitter, social network analysis, critical discourse studies, “right-wing” actors IZVLEČEK Komunikacijska razmerja na Twitterju v obdobju migrantske »krize« v Sloveniji Avtor v članku proučuje komunikacijska razmerja na Twitterju v obdobju migrantske »krize« 2015–2016 v Sloveniji. Izhajajoč iz analize socialnih omrežij in kritičnih študijev diskurza ugotavlja, da ima omrežje, ki predstavlja »levo« politično opcijo, največ članov, »desno« politično omrežje pa je bilo najvplivnejše in najdejavnejše. Med najvplivnejšimi uporabniki omrežja so politična elita, množični mediji, novinarji in javno znane osebe. Večina objav vsebuje diskriminatorni diskurz s poudarkom na varnostnem razumevanju migracij. Raziskava je pomembna zato, ker gre za enega redkih in razmeroma celovitih vpogledov v digitalno spletno migracijsko razpravo v Sloveniji. KLJUČNE BESEDE: migrantska »kriza«, Twitter, analiza socialnih omrežij, kritični študiji diskurza, »desno« usmerjeni akterji 204 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj MIGRATIONS IN ONLINE MEDIA “Migration in the media” and “media in migration” are two distinct research subfields within the broader field of media and migration studies (Wood & King, 2001; Smets et al., 2019). While the first subfield delves into media representations of migrants in mass and social media, the second subfield investigates the role of new media tech- nologies in the migration process. Research in the “migration in the media” subfield predominantly reveals that contemporary media portray migrants as “others,” “crimi- nals,” and “undesirables” (Wood & King, 2001; Consterdine, 2018; Eberl et al., 2018). On the other hand, findings from the “media in migration” subfield underscore the dual role of new media technologies, such as smartphones, in migration. They provide migrants with travel information but also track their whereabouts, movements, and interactions with others, thereby rendering them vulnerable to government surveil- lance (Zavratnik & Cukut Krilić, 2020). “Migration in the media” studies reveal that mass and social media significantly shape citizens’ perspectives on migration issues, as the majority of European citi- zens lack direct contact with migrants and rely on media-mediated content as their primary source of information (Consterdine, 2018; Eberl et al., 2018). To illustrate, Kogovšek Šalamon & Bajt (2016, p. 9) stated that had the media not reported on the 2015–2016 migrant “crisis,” most of the population would have remained unaware of the migrants’ arrival in Slovenia. Such observation underscores the importance of examining migration through the analysis of media content. It also indicates that media discourse, although not entirely detached from political discourse, strongly influences attitudes toward marginalized groups (Jalušič, 2001: 14) such as migrants. The “migration in the media” subfield can be further subdivided based on the media studied: online or offline. While studies of migration in offline media are abundant, studies addressing migration in online media—including both mass and social media—are scarcer (Eberl et al., 2018; Smrdelj, 2021). MIGRANT “CRISIS” ON TWITTER IN SLOVENIA Situated in the “migration in online media” subfield, our study delves into the communication relations on Twitter during the 2015–2016 migrant “crisis”1 in Slove- nia. The phrase migrant “crisis” is a widely established media and political label for the enormous number of migrants arriving in Europe during the second half of 2015 and the beginning of 2016. A majority of these migrants originated from Syria, 1 We use the term “crisis” in quotation marks to distinguish our perspective from the media’s and political depiction of the unprecedented number of migrants arriving in Europe as a “crisis.” Situations deemed social crises are not necessarily genuine crises in all instances. Instead, they can be framed and constructed as such by both the media and political elites (Vezovnik, 2018; Smrdelj & Vogrinc, 2020). 205 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia Afghanistan, Iraq, and their neighboring countries (Government of the Republic of Slovenia, 2016; Eurostat, 2019). War, poverty, and political upheaval triggered significant migration from these regions (Kogovšek Šalamon & Bajt, 2016). With Hungary closing its borders on October 17, 2015, Slovenia became a transit country for all migrants aiming for Germany or other northern or western European coun- tries. After the closure of the Hungarian border, the so-called “Balkan route” was realigned, shifting from the trajectory of Serbia-Hungary-Austria-Germany to that of Serbia-Croatia-Slovenia-Austria (Malešič, 2017, p. 953). Our article uses the term “migrant” to encompass all individuals who crossed borders to arrive in Europe during the migrant “crisis,” irrespective of the reasons for leaving their home country. We follow the International Organization for Migration’s definition of “migrant” as anyone who “moves away from his or her place of usual residence, whether within a country or across an international border, temporarily or permanently, and for a variety of reasons” (IOM, 2019). Given the expansive nature of the IOM definition, “migrant” can be aptly applied to numerous categories of individ- uals who reached Slovenia during the “crisis,” whether they were merely transiting Slovenia or actively seeking asylum in the country. Our study focuses on the Twitter debate between September and December 2015. This timeframe marks when most migrants arrived in Slovenia (Government of the Republic of Slovenia, 2016), and migration was most prominently highlighted in both mass and social media (Smrdelj, 2021). By choosing Twitter as our analysis medium, we aim to bridge the existing research gap in studying online media within the “migration in the media” subfield. Twitter is important to study since it is more open to the public than Facebook (posts are accessible to unregistered users) and is used mostly for political discussions rather than social dynamics (Verweij, 2012, p. 682). Moreover, Twitter plays an important role in disseminating information during social crises (Bruns et al., 2012). Last but not least, Twitter, along with Facebook, was the first source of information during the tumultuous events related to the migrant “crisis” (Lecheler et al., 2019). To understand who directed the Twitter debate unfolding during the migrant “crisis” in Slovenia, we will first review the studies on “migration in the media” on Twitter. We will define the importance of our study in this subfield. Then, the focus will shift to network theory, which provides categories for analyzing the commu- nication dynamics between social media users. To explore migration discourses in the Twitter debate, we will supplement network theory with assumptions for studying migration discourse in the media. After the theoretical part, we will outline our research questions, describe the sample, and detail our data collec- tion and analysis methodologies. After presenting the results, we will discuss the study’s main insights. 206 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj MIGRATIONS ON TWITTER: A LITERATURE REVIEW Twitter migration studies typically draw from network theory, operationalizing it in several ways: analyzing vast numbers of posts in different national languages (e.g., Gualda & Rebollo, 2016; Siapera et al., 2018); focusing on the meaning of specific hashtags in the discussion (Avraamidou et al., 2021; Barisione et al., 2019); conduct- ing a qualitative analysis of a smaller sample of posts (Kreis, 2017); examining individual user profiles of representatives of parliamentary politics (Bennett, 2016); or addressing specific viral events, such as the death of the boy Alan Kurdi (e.g., Bozdağ & Smets, 2017). Twitter migration studies reveal that humanitarian and security discourses predominantly shape the debates on the platform. As such, Twitter migration discourses mirror those typically present in the mass media (Consterdine, 2018; Eberl et al., 2018; Smrdelj, 2021). The most influential Twitter users include repre- sentatives from parliamentary politics, the mass media, and established NGO actors with online and offline influence (Ferra & Nguyen, 2017; Siapera et al., 2018). The activities of anti-immigrant movements that spread hateful and discriminatory atti- tudes on Twitter are very present (Avraamidou et al., 2021). Studies also indicate that most users have a “right-wing”2 political orientation (Bennett, 2016; Froio & Ganesh, 2019; Avraamidou et al., 2021). Our research stands out due to its unique approach to examining the migration debate in Slovenia, particularly through its expansive sample of tweets. We focus on the entire discussion and do not limit ourselves to specific user profiles or topics. Studies investigating migration discourse on Twitter target major world languages (e.g., English, French) and overlook smaller countries such as Slovenia (e.g., Gualda & Rebollo, 2016; Kreis, 2017; Siapera et al., 2018). A distinguishing methodological innovation of our study is its emphasis on the retweet network as a starting point for examining communication dynamics. Although several Twitter migration studies visualize the communication relations network (e.g., Siapera et al., 2018; Avraami- dou et al., 2021), none focus directly on retweets. Instead, they use other data to create the network (e.g., hashtags, mentions, replies). 2 Much like the term “crisis,” we enclose the terms “right” and “left” in quotation marks. This is because we do not employ them as definitive analytical concepts; their meanings can shift depending on the socio-historical context, as detailed in the Discussion section of this article. Instead, our use of these two terms relies on self-identification. If a party or medium identifies as “right-wing” or is publicly perceived as such, we tentatively label it in that manner. 207 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia NETWORK THEORY Within network theory (Himelboim, 2017; Schroeder, 2018; Hansen et al., 2020), we focus on three concepts: the network, central users, and network communi- ties (Jesenšek et al., 2021). In the following sections, we will introduce each of these concepts. Network A network epitomizes the intricate web of connections among social media users. Unlike traditional communication, which follows a linear path from sender to receiver, online interactions are bidirectional. Social media participants function both as senders and receivers of content. This dual role leads to the emergence of complex communication interactions that can be visualized graphically as a network of “nodes” (users) and “edges” (relations between users). Various forms of social media communication, such as liking posts, retweeting, following users, mentioning users, commenting on posts, etc.), can represent these “edges” (Lindgren, 2017). Central Users and Influence Central users are distinguished from other social media users due to their distinct activity or influence (e.g., Xie & Luo, 2019; Jesenšek et al., 2021). For our study, we focused on those central users notable for their influence.3 Nonetheless, defin- ing and quantifying influence is not straightforward. To accomplish our research objective, we utilized a simple definition of influence as a particular user’s ability to influence others’ opinions on a specific topic (see Dang-Xuan et al., 2013; Al-Rawi, 2019). Accordingly, we measured Twitter influence through retweets, viewing them as markers of endorsement and engagement with a user or their content (Metaxas et al., 2021). The rationale is straightforward: the more a user or their tweet is retweeted, the greater its visibility and influence is over the direction of discussion on a partic- ular topic. Thus, we categorize “most influential users” as those who are frequently retweeted, while “most influential tweets” are individual posts that garner significant retweets (e.g., Dang-Xuan et al., 2013; Al-Rawi, 2019; Jesenšek et al., 2021). 3 For space reasons, we do not focus on users who stand out for their activity in the Twitter migration debate. 208 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj Network Communities: Network Fragmentation, Polarization and Pluralization According to existing studies, social media can encourage the exchange of opin- ions between users with different ideological backgrounds (e.g., Bakshy et al., 2015; Guess et al., 2017; Arlt et al., 2019) or cause fragmented and polarized communi- ties consisting of ideologically homogeneous users who communicate mainly with each other (e.g., Doğu, 2017; Dylko et al., 2017; Jesenšek et al., 2021). Based on these communication dynamics, the three most prevalent communication patterns in social media are “network fragmentation,” “network polarization,” and “network pluralization” (Jesenšek et al., 2021). “Network fragmentation” denotes distinct user communities inside a partic- ular network (Lindgren, 2017; Jesenšek et al., 2021). Typically, these communities are characterized by members sharing similar beliefs, leading them to communi- cate frequently amongst themselves. In contrast, they seldom engage with users from other communities with different opinions (Pariser, 2011). Hence, information sources aligning ideologically with the beliefs of these communities predominate in the debate (Barisione et al., 2019). Scholars use various terms (filter bubbles, echo chambers) to emphasize the uniformity of opinions and worldviews within these network communities and the close communication relations among their members (Pariser, 2011; Rasmussen, 2016). The visualization of the network, char- acterized by fragmentation into several communities, resembles a crowd in a public square divided into smaller, separate groups of people engaged in conversation (Barisione et al., 2019). When these individual “clusters” become apparent in graph- ical representation, it signifies the network’s fragmentation and the existence of distinct communities (Rasmussen, 2016; Bruns & Highfield, 2018). The term “network polarization” denotes pronounced opposing views on a specific topic among particular communities (Doğu, 2017; Dylko et al., 2017). To ascertain whether a fragmented network is also polarized, we must analyze the discourse within its communities to discover if they hold similar or opposing opin- ions on a particular topic (Barisione et al., 2019). Moreover, “network pluralization” refers to the circulation of diverse viewpoints amongst ideologically heterogeneous users who are not “closed” into ideologically homogeneous communities. Consequently, “network pluralization” is depicted graphically as conversations among ideologically different users who are not clustered into individual communities but are dispersed throughout the network (Garrett et al., 2011; Arlt et al., 2019). 209 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia MIGRATION DISCOURSES IN THE LIGHT OF THE MEDIA CONSTRUCTION OF THE “CRISIS” Drawing from existing studies (see Consterdine, 2018; Eberl et al., 2018; Smets et al., 2019; Smrdelj, 2021), we can determine some general features of the migration discourse4 in light of the media’s construction of the “crisis.” The most important feature is the depiction of as “others” in relation to the “dominant” society, i.e., the citizens of the recipient countries. The construction of migrants’ “otherness” is pred- icated on their unfavorable and stereotypical portrayal and serves to justify their rejection and non-acceptance in the host countries. The security and criminalization discourse are the two most prevalent types of negative, stereotypical portrayals of migrants in the media. Within the security discourse, migrants are portrayed as cultural and physical threats to their host coun- tries. The criminalization discourse depicts migrants as criminals for illegally crossing the border or their alleged involvement in crimes, such as theft, public disturbances, and selling drugs (Smrdelj, 2021). The security discourse, complemented by the rhet- oric of exceptional circumstances, the criminalization discourse, and the construction of an impending threat and risk, creates the “securitization of migration,” which is the predominant way of understanding migration in the contemporary world (Malešič, 2017; Vezovnik, 2018). While negative and stereotypical depictions of migrants dominate contem- porary media (Smrdelj, 2021), some studies, such as by Šarić & Felberg (2019), highlight media attempts to overcome these negative stereotypes. They reflect on the phenomenon of migration beyond racist and discriminatory assumptions about their arrival, embracing what is termed anti-discrimination discourses. A prime example of such positive discourse is the humanitarian approach, which often paints migrants as victims of war, deserving of support rather than being framed as cultural or physical threats. However, even though humanitarian discourse is consid- ered an example of positive treatment of migrants, it may also be stereotyped and perpetuate power relations. It can portray migrants as helpless and mute victims who are discussed by others, be it journalists, politicians, police, or NGO representa- tives (Smrdelj & Vogrinc, 2020). 4 As we will explain in the methodology section, we follow Fairclough (1992, pp. 63–64), who defines discourse as a form of social practice. This refers not only to the forms of action of individuals, but also to the forms of representations. Therefore, we perceive discourse as an assortment of representation modalities pertaining to a particular topic, focusing on the portrayal of social power relations dynamics within a given text. 210 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Based on the theoretical foundation outlined above, our study poses the primary research question (RQ 1): Who dominated the Slovenian migrant “crisis” Twitter debate, and in what manner? To comprehensively address this, we have formulated the subsequent sub-questions: • SQ 1.1: Is it possible to identify communities in the retweet network? How extensive are these communities in terms of the number of users and communication relations among them? What communication patterns emerge at the level of visualization of identified communities? If we discover distinct communities in the retweet network, we will also answer the following questions for each community: • SQ 1.2: Who are the most influential users? • SQ 1.3: Which sources of information predominate? • SQ 1.4: Which migratory discourses prevail? The sample on which we built the retweet network consists of 3,103 users  who generated 35,543 tweets (of which 13,189 were retweets) between September 1 and December 31, 2015. This was the period when the number of migrants arriving in Slovenia reached its peak, and public debates were most intense. We obtained the data on April 25, 2021, using the Twitter API via Academic Research Access, a collaboration undertaken with Uroš Godnov, PhD, from the Institute for Data Qual- ity (Slovenian: Inštitut za kakovost podatkov, d.o.o.). All Slovenian posts with at least one of the following hashtags and/or words or root words were included in the sample: “#begunci”, “#migranti”, “#begunskakriza”, “#migrantskakriza”, “#ilegal- nimigranti”, “#ilegalci”, “#prebežniki”, “#ŽičnaOgraja”, “begun-”, “migra-”, “prebežni-”, “ilegal-”, in “azil”. To construct and analyze the retweet network, we utilized social network analy- sis (SNA). This method enabled us to determine which users were actively engaging in the network and with whom they forged communication relations (Himelboim, 2017; Hansen et al., 2020). Our approach to creating and analyzing the retweet network was guided by the methodologies set forth by Jesenšek et al. (2021) and Al-Rawi (2019). A more comprehensive description of the SNA methodology, accom- panied by the results of our analysis, is described in the subsequent section. We adopted a methodological amalgamation of SNA and critical discourse studies (CDS) (Krzyżanowski & Machin, 2017). CDS provides a well-established interdisciplinary perspective for studying public discourses. Central to CDS is inves- tigating how language legitimizes unequal social relations between “dominant” and “minority” society. In our particular case, we examine the social relations between the “dominant” society—the citizens of the host countries—and the “minority” 211 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia society—the migrants. Our discourse analysis is primarily concerned with how language both establishes and legitimizes these social relationships and, conversely, how it attempts to expose and deconstruct them. Our understanding of CDS closely resonates with Fairclough’s dialectical-relational approach (1992). He postulated that media texts do not only reflect or represent social relations and entities but also simultaneously construct and constitute them (Fairclough, 1992, p. 3). There- fore, power relations are invariably interwoven within a particular discourse, such as humanitarian discourse. These discourses often legitimize hierarchies through ideological mechanisms, and the CDS seeks to reveal these mechanisms (Smrdelj & Pajnik, 2022). In conducting the discourse analysis, we closely examined the tweets to discern their framing of the acceptance or rejection of migrants based on prevailing migra- tion discourses in light of the media construction of the “crisis” presented above. The combination of quantitative (SNA) and qualitative (CDS) methodological approaches grants us a holistic understanding of the characteristics of the retweet network and the communities within it. RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS Visualization of the Retweet Network We constructed the retweet network based on the “from–to” principle. Here, “from” denotes the user who posted the original tweet, while “to” signifies the user who retweeted it. In this network, the “nodes” represent users, and the “edges” corre- spond to retweets. Using R, we selected all users involved in the retweeting process, encompass- ing both the original authors whose posts were retweeted and those who actively retweeted posts by other users. We obtained 2,051 users and 13,189 retweets. Each retweet is considered an “edge.” Thus, our network comprises 13,189 “edges.” Upon importing these data into Gephi,5 we determined 8,449 “unique edges” (Hansen et al., 2020) between users. To clarify, a “unique edge” signifies a singular connection between two users, irrespective of the frequency of retweets between them. For example, if User A retweeted User B’s post five times, this translates to five retweets, or five “edges.” However, in terms of “unique edges,” this interaction is singular, so it counts as only one “unique edge.” Therefore, the figure “13,189” quantifies the number of “edges” corresponding to the sum of all retweets. At the same time, “8,449” denotes the number of “unique edges,” which served as the foundation for our network visualization in Gephi. 5 Luka Jesenšek helped us visualize the retweet network and identify communities using the Louvain algorithm in Gephi. 212 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj Having discerned the “unique edges,” we used the Louvain algorithm6 to ascer- tain the possibility of identifying communities within the retweet network. This algorithm identified forty-six communities. However, a majority of these communi- ties were deemed insignificant due to their minuscule size (e.g., just two). Therefore, our focus narrowed to the six largest communities, encompassing 92% of all users. The attributes of each of these communities within the retweet network are delin- eated below in Table 1. Communities Number of retweets Number of “unique edges” Number of users Community 1 3,372 2,315 769 (38 %) Community 2 6,292 3,493 484 (24 %) Community 3 1,194 937 254 (12 %) Community 4 720 440 152 (7 %) Community 5 711 524 126 (6 %) Community 6 591 460 99 (5 %) Communities 7–46 309 280 167 (8 %) Total 13,189 8,449 2,051 Table 1: Communities in the retweet network (source: own analysis). We determined the size of each community based on the number of users, as presented in the last column of Table 1). In Table 2, the second column shows the number of retweets generated by users in a given community, while the third column summarizes the number of “unique edges.” The penultimate row of Table 1 summarizes the attributes of the remaining forty communities. Comparing the characteristics of the six largest communities, it is evident that a larger user base within a community typically corresponds to an increased number of retweets. The exceptions are the first and the second largest communities. The second community has 285 fewer users than the first, but its users generated nearly twice as many retweets as the first community’s users. In addition, the users of the second community generated the most retweets. Finally, we visualized the retweet network of the six largest communities in the Gephi (Figure 1). The retweet network has 1,884 edges (users) and 8,169 nodes (“unique edges”). 6 The Louvain algorithm developed by Blondel et al. (2008) is based on the discovery of common communication relations among network users. Users who frequently interact are categorized within the same community. Users belonging to a particular community also communicate with users from different communities, but communication among members of the same community occurs more frequently. 213 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia Figure 1: Visualization of the network of the six largest communities (source: own analysis). Figure 1 visualizes distinct communities, each designated with a unique number and color: Community 1 is purple, Community 2 is green, Community 3 is blue, Community 4 is black, Community 5 is orange, and Community 6 is pink. Users who communicate more frequently are clustered, whereas those with fewer interactions are spaced farther apart. Figure 1 illustrates fragmentation into individual communities. Communities 1 and 2 are particularly evident, situated at opposite ends of the network, with Community 1 on the left and Community 2 on the right. The network visualization also reveals that the users of these two communities do not communicate with one another, as evidenced by the absence of purple in the green-dominated area of Community 2 and vice versa. However, Community 2, the most isolated from the other communities, clearly exemplifies network fragmentation. It is depicted as a dense cluster of green “nodes,” much denser than other communities’ “nodes.” In addition, users from other communities are not seen in the cluster of green “nodes,” unlike in Community 1, where other-colored nodes can be found among the purple “nodes.” This visual representation indicates that Community 2 members predom- inantly interact with each other and rarely branch out to converse with members from other communities (the closest to them are users from Community 6, pink color). Despite its isolation, Community 2 generated the highest number of retweets. On the other hand, users from different communities often communicate with those from other communities, leading to what we can term “network pluralization.” Figure 1 illustrates how the colors of Communities 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 intertwined in some locations. For instance, blue “nodes” (representing Community 3) appear in regions dominated by orange “nodes” (from Community 5) and black “nodes” (from Community 4). 214 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj Individual Communities’ Characteristics in the Retweet Network Network visualization enables us to assess user communication patterns. As previ- ously mentioned, we can observe both network fragmentation and pluralization simultaneously. To provide insight into the interactions within each community, we identified the ten most influential users, the dominant sources of information regarding “migrant” crisis events, and the prevalent discourses of the most retweeted tweets (Table 2). The most influential users are those whose tweets received the most “unique edges,” meaning they received the most retweets from distinct users. These users are listed in the third row of Table 2. We named each community based on the top ten most influential users identified within that community. In the fourth row of Table 2, the dominant information sources were selected based on the five most retweeted links and hashtags within each community. For instance, if “delo.si” ranked among the top five most-retweeted links of a community, we concluded that Delo newspa- per’s content was the most popular within that community. The final row of Table 2 lists each community’s dominant discourses based on discourse analysis of the five most-retweeted tweets. We separately analyzed each of the top five most-retweeted tweets and, through this analysis, assessed the prevailing discourse shaping the migration debate in that community.7 Community 1 consists of numerous public figures who form a “left-wing” network that critiques migrants’ stereotypical portrayal. Notably, this community lacks representatives from the parliamentary political “left.” Community 2 is emblem- atic of the SDP, the largest “right-wing” opposition party at the time. Prominent figures from this party, such as SDP leader Janez Janša and MPs Vinko Gorenak and Žan Mahnič, are key members. Community 3 refers to the network of the television station POP TV. The majority of its members were journalists from the station during that period, including Tjaša Slokar, Irena Joveva, Jure Tepina, Anže Božič, and Nika Kunaver. Community 4 consists of anonymous users. Determining the real identities behind these profiles is challenging, suggesting they might represent a “fake public” or perhaps just “ordinary” citizens. Community 5 is dominated by users connected with the then-ruling party MCP, such as the then-Prime Minister Miro Cerar and the Večer newspaper. Key figures from the newspaper include its former editor, Katja Šeruga, and journalists Urška Mlinarič, Vojislav Bercko, and Aleš Kocjan. Community 6 includes users related to the NSi party, such as Žiga Turk and Federico V. Potočnik. Representatives of both the parliamentary political elite and the mass media are present in every community, except for Community 4, where neither politicians nor mass media representatives are present. The prominence of politicians as influential 7 Due to space constraints and the complexity of the data, we do not list the most retweeted links, hashtags, and tweets for each community. Instead, we have provided a summarized overview of the results in Table 2. The data underlying the analysis are summarized in more detail in the author’s doctoral dissertation (Smrdelj, 2022). 215 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia Com m unity 1 Com m unity 2 Com m unity 3 Com m unity 4 Com m unity 5 Com m unity 6 N etw ork nam e U sers representing a “left-w ing” political netw ork Slovenian D em ocratic Party (SD P) PO P TV television station Publicly unknow n users M odern Centre Party (M CP) and Večer new spaper N ew Slovenia – Chris- tian D em ocrats party (N Si) The m ost influential users @ m atjasec (101) @ D elo (100) @ STA_novice (92) @ SafetAlibeg (74) @ ZerjavicD elo (64) @ FranciKek (54) @ petrasovdat (53) @ Pizam a (49) @ borutm ekina (47) @ M eli__SI (45) @ N ova24TV (121) @ RevijaReporter (119) @ JJansaSD S (117) @ JozeBiscak (104) @ strankaSD S (101) @ D am irCrncec (93) @ drVinkoGorenak (84) @ BojanPozar (78) @ ZanM ahnic (71) @ krtm en (66) @ 24ur_com (151) @ policija_si (91) @ SiolN EW S (70) @ srdjan_c (42) @ TjasaSlokar (41) @ IJoveva (38) @ juretepina (37) @ AnzeBozic (34) @ N ikaKunaver (32) @ Zurnal_24 (31) @ skyslovenia (43) @ Centrifuzija (28) @ M atjazJazbar (28) @ brane_si (22) @ RSustar (19) @ slovenistan (17) @ cashkee (17) @ zaslovenijo2 (15) @ D r_Eclectic (14) @ stavenskovrhsk1 (11) @ vladaRS (137) @ vecer (77) @ U rskaM linaric (36) @ Slovenskavojska (36) @ VojislavBercko (35) @ KatjaSeruga (26) @ M iroCerar (25) @ EKvSloveniji (20) @ StrankaSM C (13) @ a_kocjan (13) @ D om ovina_je (65) @ ZigaTurk (43) @ AntonTom azic (40) @ FVPotocnik (39) @ BCestnik (30) @ steinbuch (24) @ N ovaSlovenija (21) @ RadioO gnjisce (19) @ Andr3jaL (17) @ M ladaSlovenija (15) D om inant inform ation sources D elo, STA, Finance, Radio Študent Reporter, N ova24TV, D em okracija 24ur.com , siol.net, D elo, RTV Slovenija, Epilog Reporter, D elo Večer, D elo D om ovina, Reporter, RTV Slovenija D om inant m igration discourses Attem pts to overcom e nega- tive stereotypes, anti-discrim ination discourses Security discourse, reinforcem ent of negative stereotypes about m igrants Positive and negative discourses about m igrants Positive and negative discourses about m igrants Positive and negative discourses about m igrants Security discourse, reinforcem ent of negative stereotypes about m igrants Table 2: Characteristics of the six largest retw eet netw ork com m unities (source: ow n analysis). 216 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj users is especially noticeable in Communities 2, 5, and 6. Community 3 has the high- est concentration of media-affiliated users, predominantly from the network of the television station POP TV. From the discursive analysis of the most retweeted tweets, we find that different discourses about migrants prevail in each community. This network fragmentation, most evident in Figure 1 for Communities 1 and 2, also manifests in the dominant discourses of both communities, leading us to describe their dynamics as polar- ized. While the most retweeted tweets in Community 1 are characterized by efforts to counter negative stereotypes about migrants, the most retweeted tweets in Community 2 are characterized by a discriminatory discourse. Community 2, representing the SDP party network, generated the most retweets. However, it remains notably isolated from other communities. Visually, it is closest to Community 6, representing the NSi Party network. Both Community 2 and Community 6 predominantly feature retweets related to security discourse. In contrast, Communities 3, 4, and 5 display varied discourses, suggesting the presence of ideologically heterogeneous users. In all six communities, Slovenian mass media are the predominant sources of information, with foreign sources not being retweeted at all. There are no “alter- native” sources of information, such as websites of NGOs focusing on migrants. Regarding political orientation, “right-wing” media (the weekly Reporter, the tele- vision station Nova24TV, the weekly Demokracija, the online portal Domovina) predominate, mainly in Communities 2 and 6. “Left-wing” media, such as the weekly Mladina, do not feature prominently in retweets. In terms of ownership, the land- scape is dominated by private commercial media, while non-commercial outlets, such as RTV Slovenia and Radio Študent, are less presented. The latter occurs only in Community 1. DISCUSSION In our study, we sought to discern who dominated the Slovenian migrant “crisis” Twitter debate and how they did so. We discovered six major communities, encom- passing 92% of all users in our sample. Community 1 is populated largely by public figures from a “left-wing” network that criticizes the stereotypical portrayal of migrants. Community 2 is representative of the SDP, the largest “right-wing” oppo- sition party at the time. Community 3 is associated with the television station POP TV. Community 4 consists of publicly unknown users. Community 5 predominantly comprises users associated with the then-ruling MCP party and the Večer newspaper. Community 6 consists of users aligned with the NSi party. Community 2 is distinct; it generates the most retweets, and its users are the most isolated compared to other communities (RQ 1). 217 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia From the network visualization of the six largest communities, we discovered the coexistence of “network fragmentation” (most clearly exemplified in the case of Community 2), “network polarization” (most distinctive between Communities 1 and 2), and “network pluralization” (present across Community 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 where ideologically different users communicate with each other) (SQ 1.1). The most influ- ential users are representatives of the parliamentary political elite, such as MPs, party leaders, and the prime minister, as well as figures from the mass media, such as journalists, editors, and media institutions (SQ 1.2). Slovenian mass media are domi- nant sources of information regarding “migrant” crisis events (SQ 1.3). While there are efforts to counter negative and stereotypical portrayals of migrants, a discrim- inatory discourse emphasizing a security-centric perspective on migration proves more pervasive in Twitter debates (SQ 1.4). Our study offers one of the few comprehensive insights into the online digital discussion on migration in Slovenia. While the Slovenian migration discourse on Twitter mirrors those in other European contexts in terms of dominant users and narratives (e.g., Ferra & Nguyen, 2017; Siapera et al., 2018), our research distinctively underscores how “right-wing” political networks instrumentalize the migration debate. Conversely, representatives of the “left-wing” parliamentary political elite, such as the then United Left party,8 as well as NGOs, scholars, and other representa- tives of the “weak public,” are not among the most influential users. Although some studies demonstrate the appropriation of the online digital environment by the “right-wing” political network (e.g., Bennett, 2016; Froio & Ganesh, 2019; Avraamidou et al., 2021), its dominance is markedly pronounced in our findings. This is primarily due to the notable absence of the aforementioned social groups. The dominance of the “right-wing” political network, coupled with the diminished presence of the parliamentary “left” and other social groups offering “alternative” interpretations of the migrant situation beyond “party” lines (e.g., NGOs) (Luthar, 2017), can be attributed to structural shifts in parliamentary politics over recent decades. The “right-wing” political agenda is normalizing and becoming the center of legitimate public debate in parliamentary politics, concurrently sidelining the “left-wing” perspective. This shift becomes evident when we consider that what was once deemed “social democratic” discourse a few decades ago—advocacy for public health care, public education, labor rights, and fundamental human rights—is now labeled as “radical,” “socialist,” or “communist,” particularly by “right-wing” protago- nists. The merging of social democratic discourse with the neoliberal “right-wing” agenda and the symbolic appropriation of “left-wing” narratives by “right-wing” enti- ties both accelerate the mainstream acceptance of the “right-wing” agenda and the sidelining of “left-wing” agenda (Dolar, 2021). Consequently, the “right-wing” and neoliberal agenda becomes dominant in parliamentary politics, while the “left-wing” 8 Although the MCP party identifies as “center-left,” we do not consider it a typical “left-wing” party, given its pursuit of the neoliberal agenda during its tenure in government. 218 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj agenda finds itself more aligned with civil society, particularly within the non-gov- ernmental sector. The marginalization of “left-wing” parliamentary politics is mirrored in the Twit- ter migrant debate, with “left-wing” politicians and NGOs absent from the ranks of the most influential users. Instead, public figures from Community 1 have assumed a “symbolic” stance representing the “left” political perspective. This underscores how the migration debate on Twitter is emblematic of a broader structural shift in parlia- mentary politics, one which negatively impacts public discourse by largely confining the debate to the perspectives of the “right-wing” actors. The prominence of right-wing actors can, in part, be attributed to the inherent media logic of Twitter, which is characterized by the brevity of tweets. As post- ings are limited in character count, this type of communication does not facilitate an argumentative and comprehensive discussion of a particular topic. Instead, it becomes a fertile ground for the dissemination of anti-immigrant views, which can be conveyed succinctly, a feature typically associated with the “right-wing” political stance and the “right-wing” oriented media (Pušnik, 2017). Representatives of the “right-wing” political network adeptly harness Twitter’s media logic to further their political goals. In contrast, other social groups, such as NGOs, do not participate in the discussion as Twitter’s media logic does not afford them an equitable opportu- nity to communicate their perspectives. By narrowing the debate to the positions and views on migration held by a “right-wing” political network, Twitter’s media logic has negative consequences for the contemporary online public sphere (Fuchs, 2021). Consequently, the dominance of “right-wing” actors coincides with the domi- nance of a discriminatory discourse centered on the security viewpoint of migration. Bigo (2005) notes that globally exposed events such as the September 11, 2001, attacks in the United States contributed to the general understanding of migration as a security issue. This indicates that the “right-wing” political stance in Slovenia has simply adopted the “global” and well-established biased perspective on migration. Mass media representatives, including journalists, editors, and media insti- tutions, also stand out in the retweet network. Mass media’s dominance among the most influential users and major information sources suggests its “older” logic has adeptly harnessed social media’s “newer” logic to disseminate its content. This suggests that “older” mass media remain the key agenda-setters on Twitter. While interpreting the results of our studies, some limitations must be acknowl- edged. In some communities, the relationship between shared media content and community members is evident (e.g., in Community 2, representing the SDP party, the predominance of “right-wing” media content is anticipated). However, in some other communities, the rationale behind specific retweeting patterns remains elusive (e.g., why users associated with the Večer newspaper and those represent- ing the Slovenian government are clustered in the same community). In such cases, where the connection between users and media content is not immediately appar- ent, we need more quantitative and qualitative data for a robust retweet network 219 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia analysis. Thus, delving deeper into communication patterns within specific commu- nities and examining interactions between users across different communities is an essential next stage in the research process. CONCLUSION In this article, we examined communication dynamics on Twitter during the 2015– 2016 migrant “crisis” in Slovenia. By merging social network analysis and critical discourse studies, we discerned that while the “left-wing” political network boasted the largest membership, the “right-wing” political network was the most influential and active, as its members generated the most posts. Notably, the political elite, mass media, journalists, and public figures emerged as the most influential users. Slove- nian mass media stood out as a predominant source of information regarding the migrant “crisis” events. The vast majority of posts feature discriminatory discourse, leaning heavily toward security-centric interpretations of migration. The significance of our study lies in its provision of a nuanced, in-depth exploration of the online discourse surrounding migration in Slovenia, an area previously under-researched. Following the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and the subsequent change in government in March 2020, Twitter activity in Slovenia increased significantly (Evkoski et al., 2021). Given this shift, future investigations could pivot toward more contemporary topics, such as Ukrainian refugees in the context of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, to examine potential changes in debate structure relative to the migrant “crisis” discourse in Slovenia. Moreover, the next research step should be to supplement the social network analysis by conducting interviews and focus groups to investigate why representatives of the parliamentary political “left” and NGOs are not more organized participants in the Twitter discussion. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This research was undertaken within the framework of the research program Prob- lems of Autonomy and Identities at the Time of Globalisation (P6-0194, 2019–2024), funded by the Slovenian Research Agency, and as part of the activities funded by the University Foundation of ing. Lenarčič Milan. The complete study was published in the author’s doctoral dissertation titled “The Construction of the Refugee Crisis in Slovenia from the Perspective of the Hybrid Media System” (2022). 220 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj REFERENCES Al-Rawi, A. (2019). Twitter influentials and the networked publics’ engagement with the Rohingya crisis in Arabic and English. In K. Smets, K. Leurs, M. Georgiou, S. Witteborn & R. Gajjala (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Media and Migration (pp. 192–204). SAGE. Arlt, D., Rauchfleisch, A., & Schäfer, M. S. (2019). Between Fragmentation and Dialogue. Twitter Communities and Political Debate About the Swiss “Nuclear Withdrawal Initiative”. Environmental Communication, 13(4), 440–456. https:// doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1430600 Avraamidou, M., Ioannou, M., & Eftychiou, E. (2021). “Innocent” Hashtags? A Cautionary Tale: #IStandWithGreece as a Network of Intolerance on Twitter During a Land Border Crisis. International Journal of Communication, 15, 2849– 2869. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/16576 Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132. https://www.science. org/doi/10.1126/science.aaa1160 Barisione, M., Michailidou, A., & Massimo, A. (2019). Understanding a digital movement of opinion: The case of #RefugeesWelcome. Information, Communication & Society, 22, 1145–1164. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1410204 Bennett, S. (2016). New “crises,” old habits: Online interdiscursivity and intertextuality in UK migration policy discourses. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 16(1– 2), 140–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2016.1257753 Bigo, D. (2005). Frontier controls in the European Union: who is in control? In D. Bigo & E. Guild (Eds.), Controlling Frontiers: Free Movement into and within Europe (pp. 49–99). Ashgate. Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 10, P10008. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0803.0476 Bozdağ, Ç., & Smets, K. (2017). Understanding the Images of Alan Kurdi with “Small Data”: A Qualitative, Comparative Analysis of Tweets About Refugees in Turkey and Flanders (Belgium). International Journal of Communication, 11, 4046–4069. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/7252 Bruns, A., Burgess, J., Crawford, K., & Shaw, F. (2012). #qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods. ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation. Bruns, A., & Highfield, T. (2018). Is Habermas on Twitter? Social Media and the Public Sphere. In A. Bruns, G. Enli, E. Skogerbo, A. Larsson & C. Christensen (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics (pp. 56–73). Routledge. Consterdine, E. (2018). State-of-the-art report on public attitudes, political discourses and media coverage on the arrival of refugees. Ceaseval Research on the Common European Asylum System (02). http://ceaseval.eu/publications/02_Consterdine_ State-of-the-art_report_on_public_attitudes.pdf (2023, March 16). 221 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia Dang-Xuan, L., Stieglitz, S., Wladarsch, J., & Neuberger, C. (2013). An Investigation of Influentials and the Role of Sentiment in Political Communication on Twitter During Election Periods. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 795–825. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.783608 Doğu, B. (2020). Turkey’s news media landscape in Twitter: Mapping interconnections among diversity. Journalism, 21(5), 688–706. https://doi. org/10.1177/1464884917713791 Dolar, M. (2021, June 25). Mladen Dolar: ‘Če bi zgolj ohranjali vrednote, ne bi imeli ne Trubarja ne Kosovela’. Primorske novice. https://www.primorske.si/2021/06/24/ mladen-dolar-ce-bi-zgolj-ohranjali-vrednote-ne-bi Dylko, I., Dolgov, I., Hoffman, W., Eckhart, N., Molina, M., & Aaziz, O. (2017). The dark side of technology: An experimental investigation of the influence of customizability technology on online political selective exposure. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.031 Eberl, J., Meltzer, C. E., Heidenreich, T., Herrero, B., Theorin, N., Lind, F., Berganza, R., Boomgaarden, H. G., Schemer, C., & Strömbäck, J. (2018). The European Media Discourse on Immigration and Its Effects: A Literature Review. Annals of the International Communication Association, 42(3), 207–223. https://doi.org/10.108 0/23808985.2018.1497452 Eurostat (2019). Asylum in the EU Member States. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ documents/2995521/9665546/3-14032019-AP-EN.pdf/eca81dc5-89c7-4a9d- 97ad-444b6bd32790 (2023, March 17). Evkoski, B., Mozetič, I., Ljubešić, N., & Kralj Novak, P. (2021). Community evolution in retweet networks. PLoS ONE, 16(9), e0256175-1–e0256175-21. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256175 Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Polity Press. Ferra, I., & Nguyen, D. (2017). #Migrantcrisis: “tagging” the European migration crisis on Twitter. Journal of Communication Management, 21(4), 411–426. https://www. emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JCOM-02-2017-0026/full/html Froio, C., & Ganesh, B. (2019). The transnationalisation of far right discourse on Twitter. European Societies, 21(4), 513–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2 018.1494295 Fuchs, C. (2021). Social media: a critical introduction. Sage. Garrett, K. R., Carnahan, D., & Lynch, E. K. (2011). A turn toward avoidance? Selective exposure to online political information, 2004–2008. Political Behavior, 35, 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9185-6 Government of the Republic of Slovenia [Slovenian: Vlada Republike Slovenije] (2016). Migracije v številkah. https://www.policija.si/images/stories/DelovnaPodrocja/ meja/migracije/angleska_besedila/2016/02_februar/02_februar/160202_ migranti.pdf (2023, March 16). Gualda, E., & Rebollo, C. (2016). The refugee crisis on Twitter: A diversity of discourses at a European crossroads. Journal of Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, 4(3), 199–212. http://hdl.handle.net/10272/13624 222 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj Guess, A., Nyhan, B., Lyons, B., & Reifler, J. (2017). Avoiding the echo chamber about echo chambers. Knight Foundation. Hansen, D. L., Shneiderman, B., Smith, M. A., & Himelboim, I. (2020). Twitter: Information flows, influencers, and organic communities. In D. L. Hansen, B. Shneiderman, M. A. Smith, I. Himelboim (Eds.), Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL (Second Edition) (pp. 161–178). Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi. org/10.1016/b978-0-12-817756-3.00011-x Himelboim, I. (2017). Social network analysis (social media). In J. Matthes (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods (pp. 1–15). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0236 IOM (2019). IOM Definition of “Migrant”. https://www.iom.int/who-migrant-0 (2022, March 3). Jalušič, V. (2001). Ksenofobija ali samozaščita? O vzpostavljanju nove slovenske državljanske identitete. Poročilo skupine za spremljanje nestrpnosti, 1, 12–43. Jesenšek, L., Verčič, D., & Kronegger, L. (2021). Struktura slovenske politične razprave na Twitterju ob volitvah v Evropski parlament. Teorija in praksa, 58(1), 49–71. https://www.doi.org/10.51936/tip.58.1.49-71 Kogovšek Šalamon, N., & Bajt, V. (2016). Introduction. In N. K. Šalamon & V. Bajt (Eds.), Razor-Wired: Reflections on Migration Movements Through Slovenia in 2015 (pp. 7–11). Peace Institute. http://www.mirovni-institut.si/wp-content/ uploads/2016/03/Razor_wired_publikacija_web.pdf (2023, March 16). Kreis, R. (2017). #refugeesnotwelcome: Anti-refugee discourse on Twitter. Discourse & Communication, 11(5), 498–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481317714121 Krzyżanowski, M., & Machin, D. (2017). Critical approaches: media analysis in/and critical discourse studies. In C. Colter & D. Perrin (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Language and Media (pp. 62–76). Routledge. Lecheler, S., Matthes, J., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2019). Setting the Agenda for Research on Media and Migration: State-of-the-Art and Directions for Future Research. Mass Communication and Society, 22(6), 691–707. https://doi.org/10.1 080/15205436.2019.1688059 Lindgren, S. (2017). Digital media and society. SAGE. Luthar, B. (2017). Begunci in “Odmevi”: epistemologija konvencij. Dve domovini / Two Homelands, 45, 153–168. Malešič, M. (2017). The securitisation of migrations in Europe: The case of Slovenia. Teorija in praksa, 54(6), 947–968. Metaxas, P., Mustafaraj, E., Wong, K., Zeng, L., O’Keefe, M., & Finn, S. (2021). What Do Retweets Indicate? Results from User Survey and Meta-Review of Research. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 9(1), 658–661. Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think. Penguin Publishing Group. Pušnik, M. (2017). Dinamika novičarskega diskurza populizma in ekstremizma: moralne zgodbe o beguncih. Dve domovini / Two Homelands, 45, 137–152. 223 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 Communication Relations on Twitter During the Migrant “Crisis” in Slovenia Rasmussen, T. (2016). The Internet Soapbox: Perspectives on a Changing Public Sphere. Universitetsforlaget. Schroeder, R. (2018). Towards a theory of digital media. Information, Communication & Society, 21(3), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1289231 Siapera, E., Boudourides, M., Lenis, S., & Suiter, J. (2018). Refugees and network publics on Twitter: Networked framing, affect, and capture. Social Media + Society, 4(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118764437 Smets, K., Leurs, K., Georgiou, M., Witteborn, S., & Gajjala, R. (2019). Editorial Introduction – Media and Migration: Research Encounters. In K. Smets, K. Leurs, M. Georgiou, S. Witteborn & R. Gajjala (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Media and Migration (pp. xlv–lxii). SAGE. Smrdelj, R., & Vogrinc, J. (2020). Migrant Objectification in Television News Discourse in the Context of Criminalisation: An Example Concerning Slovenian Public Television Broadcast News. In N. Kogovšek Šalamon (Ed.), Causes and Consequences of Migrant Criminalization (pp. 287–305). Springer. https://www. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43732-9_14 Smrdelj, R. (2021). Research on Migration in Slovenian Media: The “Other” in the Period of “Crisis”. Annales, 31(3), 519–534. https://www.doi.org/10.19233/ASHS.2021.33 Smrdelj, R. (2022). The Construction of the Refugee Crisis in Slovenia from the Perspective of the Hybrid Media System [Doctoral dissertation, University of Ljubljana]. Smrdelj, R., & Pajnik, M. (2022). Intersectional representation in online media discourse: reflecting anti-discrimination position in reporting on same-sex partnerships. Gender, Technology and Development, 26(3), 463–484. https://doi. org/10.1080/09718524.2022.2144100 Šarić, L., & Felberg, T. R. (2019). Representations of the 2015/2016 “migrant crisis” on the online portals of Croatian and Serbian public broadcasters. In L. Viola & A. Musolff (Eds.), Migration and Media: Discourses about Identities in Crisis (pp. 203–238). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/ dapsac.81.10sar Verweij, P. (2012): Twitter links between politicians and journalists. Journalism Practice, 6(5–6), 680–691. Vezovnik, A. (2018). Securitizing migration in Slovenia: a discourse analysis of the Slovenian refugee situation. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 16(1–2), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2017.1282576 Wood, N., & King, R. (2001). Media and Migration: An Overview. In R. King & N. Wood (Eds.), Media and migration: Constructions of mobility and difference (pp. 1–22). Routledge. Xie, Q., & Luo, T. (2019). Examining User Participation and Network Structure via an Analysis of a Twitter-Supported Conference Backchannel. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(5), 1160–1185. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118791262 Zavratnik, S., & Cukut Krilić, S. (2020). Digitalni begunci: transformacije migracijskih poti ali ko pametni telefon nadomesti kovček. Založba FDV, Založba ZRC. 224 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S • 5 9 • 2 0 2 4Rok Smrdelj POVZETEK KOMUNIKACIJSKA RAZMERJA NA TWITTERJU V OBDOBJU MIGRANTSKE »KRIZE« V SLOVENIJI Rok Smrdelj Avtor v članku proučuje komunikacijska razmerja na Twitterju v obdobju migrant- ske »krize« 2015–2016 v Sloveniji. Izhajajoč iz metod za analizo socialnih omrežij, ki jih dopolnjuje s kritičnimi študiji diskurza, ugotavlja, da v omrežju poobjav oz. retvitov obstaja šest večjih skupnosti. Skupnost 1 sestavljajo različne javne osebe, za katere je mogoče reči, da predstavljajo »levo« usmerjeno omrežje, ki je kritično do negativnega in enoznačnega opisovanja migrantov. Skupnost 2 je omrežje stranke SDS. Skupnost 3 se nanaša na omrežje televizijske hiše POP TV, Skupnost 4 pa zajema javnosti neznane uporabnike. V Skupnosti 5 prevladujejo uporabniki, pove- zani s takratno vladno stranko SMC in dnevnikom Večer. V Skupnosti 6 pa najdemo uporabnike, povezane s politično stranko NSi. Analiza je pokazala, da je »levo« poli- tično omrežje najštevilčnejše, vendar pa je »desno« politično omrežje najvplivnejše in najdejavnejše, saj so njegovi člani objavili največ retvitov. Med najvplivnejšimi uporabniki prevladujejo predstavniki parlamentarne poli- tične elite, kot so poslanci, predsedniki političnih strank in predsednik vlade, ter množičnih medijev, kot so novinarji, uredniki in medijske institucije. Prevladujoči viri informiranja o dogajanju v povezavi z migrantsko »krizo« so slovenski množični mediji. Čeprav se v nekaterih skupnostih pojavljajo poskusi vzpostavitve protidiskri- minatornega migracijskega diskurza, pa je v splošnem bolj viralen diskriminatorni diskurz s poudarkom na varnostnem razumevanju migracij. Raziskava je eden redkih razmeroma celovitih vpogledov v digitalno spletno razpravo na temo migracij v Sloveniji. Čeprav se slovenska razprava o migracijah na Twitterju v splošnem ne razlikuje od podobnih razprav v drugih nacionalnih okoljih v Evropi, pa je posebnost raziskave v tem, da za analizo omrežja retvitov zelo jasno pokaže, da migracijsko razpravo instrumentalizirajo uporabniki, povezani z »desnim« političnim omrežjem, predstavniki »leve« parlamentarne politične elite (na primer takratna stranka Združena levica) pa niso med najvplivnejšimi uporab- niki. Prav tako umanjkajo NVO, strokovnjaki in drugi predstavniki »šibke javnosti«. Avtor navedeno ugotovitev tematizira v kontekstu širših strukturnih premikov na področju parlamentarne politike, kjer smo v zadnjih nekaj desetletjih priča vse večji normalizaciji »desne« in marginalizaciji »leve« politične agende. Pomemben »struk- turni« pogoj za prevlado »desnice« je tudi medijska logika Twitterja. Zaradi kratkosti objav Twitter ne omogoča argumentirane in izčrpne razprave na posamezno temo. Namesto tega je ugoden teren za širjenje protipriseljenskih diskriminatornih stališč, ki so v splošnem značilna za »desno« politično opcijo in »desno« usmerjene medije, ta forma pa ni primerna za kompleksno in argumentirano razpravo, ki bi jo lahko zagotovile v razpravi manjkajoče družbene skupine. D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 TEMATSKI SKLOP / THEMATIC SEC TION MIGRACIJE DELOVNE SILE V UKRAJINI IN NA OBMOČJU NEKDANJE SOVJETSKE ZVEZE L A B O R M I G R AT I O N I N U K R A I N E A N D T H E P O S T - S O V I E T S PAC E Z h a n n a B o l a t I ntroduc t ion: Labor M igrat ion in Uk raine and the Post-Soviet Space Te t i a n a M a r u s i a k , O k s a n a K hy m ov yc h , Vo l o d y my r H o b l y k , Va s y l P i g o s h , U l i a n a Ro s o l a M igrat ion Abroad as a Socia l Consequence of Transformations of the I nst i tute of Educat ion in Modern Uk raine A k m a n a t A b u ova , N u r l a n B a i g a by l ov, M u k h t a r A b d i ka k i m ov, S a l t a n a t A u b a k i r ova , G u l n a r A s s y l k h a n ova Socia l -Economic I ntegrat ion of K azak h M igrants in Turkey Z hu l d y z I m a s h e va Explor ing Ethnic Entrepreneurship: Family Business of Taj ik M igrants O l e g Ya r o s h e n ko, Vo l o d y my r H a ra s h c hu k , O l e n a M o s ka l e n ko, G a l i n a Ya kov l e va , Vi t a l i i Sv i t l yc h ny i A Comparat ive Analys is of Forced M igrants’ R ights Abroad and in Uk raine and Control O ver Their Obser vance Under Condit ions of Mar t ia l Law A i g e r i m Ad i l g a z i n ova , Lya i l ya B a l a ka ye va , M a ra G u b a i d u l l i n a M igrant Issues in Contemporar y Japan G u l s a ra Ka p p a s s ova , M e i ra m g u l A l t y b a s s a r ova , G a n i Ye l mu ra t ov, M a d i n a Ra k h i m b a e va , B o r i s Po l o m a r c hu k M igrat ion Processes in the Republ ic of K azak hstan: Regular i t ies, Problems, and Prospec ts ČL ANKI / ARTICLES Lo r e d a n a Pa n a r i t i A H istor ical Analys is of Lef t-Wing Trade Union Posit ions Regarding Bangladeshi Workers in Monfalcone ( I ta ly) and Bosnian Workers in S lovenia V l a d i m i r I ve t a , M a r i j e t a Ra j kov i ć I ve t a M igrat ions, C i t izenships, and the R ight and Choice to Play for a Nat ional Footbal l Team with a Focus on the Croat ian Nat ional Team M a r j e t a Vr b i n c, D o n n a M . T. C r. Fa r i n a , A l e n ka Vr b i n c Or is s lovar jev in pr i ročnikov za učenje angleščine s lovensk ih izsel jencev v ZDA v obdobju 1895–1919 Ro k S m r d e l j Communicat ion Relat ions on Twitter Dur ing the M igrant “Cr is is” in S lovenia Ka t j a Ko b o l t Postmigraci jsk a estet ik a : Avtof ikc i jsko narat ivno delovanje v pisanju Di jane Matković in v izualnem ust var janju Anne Ehrenstein 592 0 2 4 9 7 7 0 3 5 3 6 7 7 0 1 3 ISSN 0353-6777 ISSN 1581-1212 59 2 0 2 4 D V E D O M O V I N I • T W O H O M E L A N D S 5 9 • 2 0 2 4 DD 59 ovitek final hrbet 15 roza pastel.indd 1-3 6. 02. 2024 13:29:31