We get an awful lot of negative immigration stories in the papers. If we are to believe the likes of the Mail and Express that they are merely reporting the facts and are trying to contribute to an open and honest debate on immigration, then it's only right they should cover positive immigration stories. If they don't, that might add to a suspicion that they couldn't give a shit about reporting the news, and are merely telling versions of their own narrative to suit a prejudiced agenda.
A lot is written about immigrants from Europe. But let's also not forget the importance of bringing in refugees, who can also contribute greatly, and give a lot back:
This is a truly inspirational story reported by the BBC a couple of weeks ago about Naim Dangoor, a former refugee (I imagine he would be called an 'ex-asylum seeker' in certain other media outlets) who is now trying to give something back to the country that protected him when he needed safe refuge, with a new bursary scheme.
I wonder how the Mail covered the story?
Oh. I see.
I suppose you could argue that's a one-off. When the FT reported earlier this year
how did the Mail report the findings of Christian Dustmann?
Oh. I see.
Which is odd, because some academics' views on immigration do get printed:
Funny that. No room in the mail for Dangoor or Dustmann; but plenty for Metcalf.