(Transcript from World News Radio)

They might try to dress it up as insightful social commentary, but analysis shows debate about refugees is frequently divisive, hurtful and vilifying.

That's the finding of a study by University of Adelaide researchers assessing talkback radio callers, politicians and the media during 2007 and 2008 when migration from Africa, in particular what's now South Sudan, was a burning issue.

It's prompted concerns that longstanding but veiled racism could evolve into explicit racial hatred if protections under the Racial Discrimination Act are wound back.

Mabok Deng Mabok Marial knows the ugly face of racism only too well.

He's a leader of South Australia's South Sudanese community, head of the African Community Council, a respected multicultural adviser and government employee - but that hasn't stopped him being subjected to racial abuse.

"It happened to me myself. As I was walking, coming out of work, a person thought I was on the dole. Just abused me for no reason. And I just kept silent, jumped in my car and drove away. So we do still find those kind of things even though the laws are there. But if you take it (the law) away completely that gives the right for anyone to really abuse as you like."

He describes the proposed changes to anti discrimination laws as pathetic, arguing they'll remove what little protection exists for people subjected to vilification.

"Most people now are patient - they know that if you complain this person will at least be questioned and asked, and told you know, you can't do that again. But if that person is abusing you and nothing is happening a lot of people who are short tempered will resort to fighting and that's not going to be something good within the community."

Mr Mabok's story is an example of overt racism, but researchers are concerned about more insidious commentary made to look like intellectual analysis, that either intentionally or unwittingly debases people.

Public debate around African migration reached a crescendo in Adelaide about six years ago when then Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews sought to defend a decision to cut the humanitarian refugee quota from African nations.

Mr Andrews said the decision was because some groups didn't seem to him to be quickly settling into the Australian way of life.

Then, the stabbing murder of South Sudanese boy provoked further talkback radio discussion about social integration.

University of Adelaide social psychologist Dr Scott Hanson-Easey has assessed the rhetoric of that period and says whilst the speakers didn't regard their words as racist, that's how they were received within the refugee community.

"We also found that Kevin Andrews and lay speakers on talkback radio saw cultural differences as one of the reason why Sudanese refugees purportedly weren't integrating into Australian society quickly, other spoke about like an inherent tribal nature of Sudanese refugees, and these qualities were kind of treated in a way that was kind of deep seated and difficult to change, in fact culture was kind of spoken about as being something that drive them into events, violent events that were being publicised at the time on radio and in the media."

Dr Hanson-Easey says while he thinks society needs to start talking more maturely about racism, proposals to water down legislative protections against vilification is concerning.

"I think the changes to the Racial Discrimination Act, especially subsection 4 which seems to allow pretty broad exemptions from what counts as vilifications - it seems that people can say or write what they like if it's aimed at public discussion, if it adds to public discussion, whether it vilifies or causes racial hatred or not. So, on the face of it that appears to open up some gates for people to say whatever they want."

One who believes people should be careful of what they say regardless of the law is South Australia's Equal Opportunity Commissioner Anne Gale.

"The use of language is really important. Even when we think we're not offending somebody or sounding racist, some people may feel that that is racist, and I think it's really important that we understand the impact of language and in what forum and what way that is used. Because public debate and freedom of speech must be maintained in our country, but we don't want to have communities isolated and feeling vilified or separate because of language that's not necessary."

Ms Gale says Adelaide's South Sudanese community has worked diligently to address negative perceptions and complaints of racism have eased.

But she says it hasn't disappeared altogether, and racism remains a constant source of concern to the Commission.

"At the Equal Opportunity Commission complaints of racism constitute around 20 per cent, so one fifth of our complaints, one fifth of our work relates to that. They often relate to language - being described by the colour of their skin, people being told to go home - and that still occurs in our community, and so community education is really important in making us all accommodate diversity in our community."

The Commission's education focus has turned from traditional media to the fast growing and difficult to monitor realm of social media.

"The world of social media is here, and it's a way where freedom of speech is readily accommodated, but there are plenty of examples and concerns that relate to bullying, racism, the treatment of other people in a way where you're not dealing face to face with people and for some reason that seems to provide an opportunity for people to provide words without really thinking about it, and there are examples here in South Australia where we're looking at social media and how people can counteract negative conduct - so it's about being upskilled yourself to deal with things when you see them in other forms of media."

Mabok Deng Mabok Marial says racial hatred is already a problem and winding back racial discrimination laws will only make it harder for people who are abused to stay engaged in society.

He says the current laws offer some protection and redress from vilification, and without them the future looks grim.

"If you are working, the option is to leave that work because you will be abused every day and nothing is going to happen. If you are at school, kids will racially abuse you every day, so the option is to leave the school. So you can see now the effect that it is going to have in the community. A lot of kids are going to be out of school, a lot of also migrants who are working will probably leave work because they're racially being abuse or intimidated at work and nothing is going to happen. So it's going to be chaos.