Media discourse frames Islamophobia as increasing and institutional.

Evidence

The collocates show the association of Islamophobia with racism and other forms of group-based antipathy, such as antisemitism, homophobia, sexism and xenophobia. The collocates also show how Islamophobia is reported as increasing, with ‘rampant’, ‘rise’, ‘risen’ and ‘upsurge’ appearing in the first corpus and ‘rife’, ‘virulent’ and ‘tide’ appearing in the second. Islamophobia appears as taking institutional form in the first corpus, presumably relating to the second report published in 2004, where the term ‘institutional Islamophobia’ was coined (Runnymede Trust 2004). — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 630

Categorization

• DEFINE: Documents ‘institutional Islamophobia’ as a term coined in the 2004 Runnymede report — a definitional marker in the framework’s evolution.
• XREF: connects to: Retaining ‘Islamophobia’ over victim-centred terms is necessary because media negativity attaches to ‘Islam’ itself. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 614; Discussion of Islamophobia in British media increased and grew more serious over time. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 620; Media framing constructs the reality audiences accept about Islam. — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 497 (+9 more)

Related

• British press language linked Islamophobia to racism and institutional forms (similarity 0.90)
• Discussion of Islamophobia in British media increased and grew more serious over time. (similarity 0.88)
• Retaining ‘Islamophobia’ over victim-centred terms is necessary because media negativity attaches to ‘Islam’ itself. (similarity 0.86)
• Islamophobia as a concept never reached everyday popular discourse. (similarity 0.86)
• Broadcast journalists frame Islamophobia as racism, unlike centre-right print journalists. (similarity 0.85)
• The media is not the origin or sole source of Islamophobia (similarity 0.84)
• Islamophobic content has shifted from crude cartoons to globally shared narratives and institutional suspicion. (similarity 0.84)
• The term Islamophobia was nearly absent from the British press during 1998–2003. (similarity 0.84)
• Yearly Islamophobia mentions in the British press nearly doubled after 2010 (similarity 0.83)
• Post-2000 European Islamophobia emerged from terror, media, and the war on terror (similarity 0.83)
• Media bias against Muslims remains as prevalent today as in 1997 (similarity 0.83)
• Islamophobia debates operate at distinct levels of definition, cause, and effect (similarity 0.82)
• Islamophobia gained massive discursive resonance in Europe within about a decade (similarity 0.82)
• Islamophobia usage rose in British press while sarcastic or denying uses halved (similarity 0.82)
• Think tanks, academia, and media institutions jointly produce Islamophobia (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Islamophobia is systemic and institutionalized, not merely individual prejudice #corroborates (0.90) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 641
• Media framing constructs the reality audiences accept about Islam. #expands (0.85) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 497
• British press language linked Islamophobia to racism and institutional forms #exemplifies (0.80) — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 625
• Islamophobia predates organized networks and serves structural functions across the political spectrum #corroborates (0.80)
• The media is not the origin or sole source of Islamophobia #qualifies (0.78) — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 836