Poland's experience with migration differs significantly from other EU countries. While emigration traditionally exceeded immigration, this balance shifted after 2015, primarily due to economic migration from Ukraine. The years 2015-2018 witnessed increased migratory waves from Africa and the Middle East into the EU, significantly impacting the Polish political landscape, particularly during the 2015 parliamentary and 2018 local elections. The study focuses on media discourse during this period, acknowledging the interconnectedness of traditional and online media in shaping public opinion. The Polish media landscape is characterized by political polarization, with nationalist and conservative newspapers contrasting sharply with modernist and pro-European publications. This study examines the dynamics of this discourse, mapping its main topics and analyzing the securitization of migration, differentiating between the terms "migrant" and "refugee" as defined by international law and common understanding.

The study draws upon existing literature on securitization theory, particularly the Copenhagen School's approach which emphasizes the performative nature of security speech acts. The authors discuss the limitations of existing securitization theories in explaining variations in the levels of migration securitization, highlighting the need for a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between securitizing actors, speech acts, and audiences. The study also reviews relevant research on media discourse analysis, particularly the combined use of corpus linguistics (CL) and critical discourse analysis (CDA) in examining discourses of refugees and asylum seekers. Furthermore, it references studies on media polarization, filter bubbles, and the impact of media on public attitudes toward refugees.

This study employed a mixed-methods approach to analyze media discourse on migration in Poland from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018. Data collection involved monitoring TV stations (TVP1, Polsat, TVN, TVP Info, TVN 24), newspapers (Fakt, Super Express, Gazeta Wyborcza, Dziennik Gazeta Prawna, Rzeczpospolita, Gazeta Polska Codziennie, Gość Niedzielny, Polityka, Newsweek Polska, Sieci, Tygodnik Do Rzeczy), and internet portals (wp.pl, onet.pl, interia.pl, gazeta.pl, polki.pl). The resulting corpus of 18,563 texts was analyzed using three methods: 1. **Media content analysis (quantitative):** Corpus linguistics (CL) was used to analyze the frequency of keywords (e.g., "migracje," "migrant," "uchodźcy") and collocations, examining the semantic preferences and connotations associated with terms like "immigrant" and "refugee". The SketchEngine tool was employed for lemmatisation, co-occurrence analysis, and term extraction. 2. **Media content analysis (qualitative):** Critical discourse analysis (CDA) was applied to a sample of 200 texts to identify dominant themes and narratives in the discourse of selected media outlets (Gazeta Wyborcza, Gazeta Polska Codziennie, and tabloids). 3. **Securitization Analysis:** The study analyzed the prominence of security-related themes across different media outlets, assessing the level of securitization of migration discourse. The study compared the discourse of liberal (Gazeta Wyborcza), conservative (Gazeta Polska Codziennie), and tabloid newspapers (Fakt, Super Express), examining the frequency of keywords, collocations, and the overall thematic focus to identify differences in their portrayal of migration.

The analysis revealed a significant temporal pattern in media coverage, with two peaks in September 2015 (the onset of the migrant crisis) and June 2017 (a dispute between the European Commission and the Polish government). Quantitative analysis using CL showed variations in the frequency and connotations of terms like "migrant," "refugee," and "illegal immigrant" across different media outlets. Gazeta Wyborcza (GW), a liberal newspaper, used "person," "refugee," and "immigrant" frequently, often in a context of human rights and European solidarity. Gazeta Polska Codziennie (GPC), a conservative newspaper, favored "immigrant," often in a negative context, alongside terms like "Muslim immigrant." Tabloids frequently used "refugee" and linked it to specific numbers to heighten emotional impact, showcasing a wider range of perspectives than opinion-forming papers. CDA revealed a sharp ideological divide. GW focused on the government's response to EU refugee relocation policies, emphasizing the need for solidarity, and portraying Ukrainian migrants positively. GPC highlighted negative consequences, anti-refugee protests, and security threats, often framing migration as a "clash of civilizations." Tabloids, while showing fewer articles on migration, relied heavily on fear and sensationalism, aligning at times with either GW or GPC but also showing an independent line of criticism. The collocation analysis underscored the prominence of "illegal immigrant" across all media types, revealing a common focus on the legal aspects of migration. The term "Muslim migrants" appeared more frequently in conservative media, reinforcing religious divisions.

The findings demonstrate a clear polarization of media discourse on migration in Poland, mirroring the broader political landscape. The conservative media's focus on security threats and negative consequences of migration, contrasted with the liberal media's emphasis on solidarity and economic benefits (especially regarding Ukrainian migrants), reflects underlying ideological differences and contributes to the formation of filter bubbles. The tabloid press's more varied approach, while employing fear and sensationalism, suggests a distinct audience engagement strategy and may help explain the lack of consistent political leaning. The study highlights the influence of the ruling party's agenda-setting power in shaping the discourse, particularly regarding the EU quota dispute. The consistent use of "illegal immigrant" underscores the legal framework's central role in shaping perceptions of migration. The prominence of "Muslim migrants" in the conservative press reinforces pre-existing religious and national divisions in Polish society.

This study demonstrates a significant polarization in Polish media discourse on migration, reflecting a broader societal division. Conservative media emphasized negative consequences and security concerns, while liberal media highlighted solidarity and economic benefits. Tabloids, while fewer in number, used fear and sensationalism, demonstrating a more varied and less politically-aligned perspective. The study emphasizes the importance of understanding how media shapes public opinion on migration, particularly within contexts of political polarization. Further research could explore the long-term impact of this polarized discourse on public attitudes and policy decisions, investigating the effects of filter bubbles and the role of social media in reinforcing these divisions.

The study's focus on a specific time period (2015-2018) limits its generalizability to other time frames. The analysis relied on a specific set of media outlets, potentially overlooking other relevant perspectives. Although the authors attempted to minimize bias through various methodological approaches, some subjectivity in the qualitative analysis (CDA) is unavoidable. Finally, the study focused primarily on the press; further research including social media and other forms of communication may offer more comprehensive insights into public discourse on migration.