Media Perspective on Secure Communities in the United States - Essay Example

Media Perspective on Secure Communities in United s The program of Secure Communities was initiated in 2008 toencourage information sharing among the federal, state and local law enforcers in the United States. The program is geared towards the deportation of individuals that are found illegally in the country. The position of the media in the United States has been to inform and shape opinions on what is happening locally and internationally. They have reported several incidences that in one way or the other are influenced by the Secure Communities program. However, their voice on the program has not been well articulated, most of the media platforms have not come up with a substantive position. At the initial stages of implementation, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement took a firm stand that was later diluted by the civil society and the media. According to a report by Alex Johnson, a reporter with NBC News, the agency was stringent in the adoption of the policy. The report states that they were not ready to tolerate opposition from neither the state agencies nor the county authorities. The process seemed difficult but the authority was very keen on its implementation, the media further reported on the issue especially on the criticism and dissatisfaction by the state governments. The New York Times reported about the incidence as well as CNN. Some of the media platforms have their personnel criticizing the nature in which the agency was planning to approach the issue. As early as 2010, two years after its adoption the policy started gaining media popularity for all the wrong reasons. The agency was purported to have been deporting innocent individuals. According to their report released in the 2010, up to 27% of the deportees were individuals that had not participated in any criminal activity (Johnson 1). The program has been faulted by some media platforms of targeting innocent people or individuals who have committed minor offences. According to Robert Morgenthau of ‘The Daily Beast’, the federal program has targeted quite a number of immigrants who have no criminal record. He asserts, “Immigrants with no criminal record, who fall into no priority category for removal, should not become ‘targeted’ for deportation simply because they made a right turn without signalling” (Morgenthau 1). Reporting on the same issue, Elena Shore of the New America Media says that ‘Although the program's goal is to prioritize the deportation of those with a criminal record, it has led to the deportation of thousands of immigrants with no criminal records” (Shore 1). Reporting on the same issue, Elena Shore of the New America Media says that ‘Although the program's goal is to prioritize the deportation of those with a criminal record, it has led to the deportation of thousands of immigrants with no criminal records”. These views demonstrate the dissatisfaction that has been advanced by the media personnel against the program. The opposition can be translated to capture the views of other media platforms since their voice has not been heard. The data sharing system has received criticism from the members of the fourth estate. The Secure Communities Program has been faulty in some instances leading to insurmountable damages. In July 2012, James Eng of NBC news reported a case of a man who was held in maximum prison for allegedly being considered for deportation under the provisions of the program. The man went ahead to sue the government for the illegal jailing, marking the first case to challenge the contentious program. The challenge of the program in a court of law by an individual attracted the interest of the media hence facilitating the media criticism (Eng 1). The mode of data transmission has been questioned with the media personnel casting doubts on the media used. There is also likelihood of probable errors that could have result to criminalization of an innocent citizens, asserts the reporter. Despite the stringency adopted by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, lapses have resulted to massive withdrawal. The media has been in the forefront in giving the public up to date information on the developments in the program. This has mounted public protests forcing some states governments to oppose the program. For example in California, the legislators have attempted to shield the so-called ‘illegal immigrants’ under the federal plan from being deported to other countries. According to Fox News, the chamber was at advanced stages of developing a Trust Act that would counter the program. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel was also seen to oppose the program according the media reports (Morgenthau 1). These oppositions presented through the media have helped in shaping not only the public opinion but also that of the journalists. Other states that have been reported to be in opposition of the program include Massachusetts, Illinois, and New York; this is according to a CNN report on the August of 2011 (CNN 1). These developments are attributable to the sluggish implementation of the plan mainly under the Obama regime. Some journalists have viewed the program as a platform for concealing illegal immigrants and crime. The implementation of the program is a caution to the illegal immigrants and other criminals from foreign countries that will be more cautious. Tamara of the Huff Post has stated that the strategy is a potential way of facilitating the immigrants to keep off criminal activities. (Tamara 1). It is highly likely that immigrants will completely avoid the law enforcers hence making the program a futile activity. New York Times has reported that there are varieties of reasons why some of the states have come into total disagreement with the policy. This follows the withdrawal of Connecticut, Chicago, Washington, New York, Santa Clara County and the latest New Orleans in the program. The main reason has been the lawsuits that have been advanced against the government for violation of individual rights (Le Van 1). The foundations of the program have been criticized by the media for not being guided by the principles of justice. Michelle Fei of the North American Congress on Latin America has cited that the truth behind the deportations has been based on the hypocrisy that fairness would prevail, a situation that has not been experienced. The families have detested the moves according to her 2011 report. She further states that the program has brought a lot of biasness and the police are getting used to execute what is not right for the people. The residents of New York staged street demonstrations to push their governor Cuomo to suspend the program; this followed the suspension of the program. These incidences made ICE to withdraw the Memorandum of understanding that it required the states to sign (Fei 1). The voice of the media has been heard with varying tone as demonstrated y these incidences. However, it is apparent that most of the media personalities that have aired or written their views have been biased towards the non-agreement with its provisions. It has been seen that the main role of the media has been to inform the public on the incidences surrounding the program. Most of the online and print sources have brought information to the public that is not biased towards any side. This is probably a strategy to help in facilitating good decision-making based on information and not impulse. Considering the crumbling nature of the program, they have just reported objectively. Despite giving their opinions, the majority of the media personnel have not demonstrated a strong opinion but otherwise they have embraced an argumentative approach that looks at both the positive and the negatives that emanates. The other federal agencies such as the police have been target by the media for the way they have implementing the program. They have reported that the program is a distracter to the police, diverting their energies and resources to creating mistrust and suspicion with the immigrants who are potential targets whether they are lawful or not. However, the media has reported that despite the challenges, the Department of homeland Security was successful to have reached up to one thousand and five hundred jurisdictions (CNN 1). Racial profiling is one of the aspects that the media has brought forward having influence over the program. PR Newswire on June 18 2012 reported that despite the program making good improvement in terms of its implementation there are quarters that have faulted it over being racially discriminative. The site provides that the program has been effective in rooting out illegal immigrants, an aspect that has been beneficial to the law-abiding citizens. Citing the report by the Centre for Migration Studies, they complement their argument by saying that mot of the cases of that have been handled are related to recidivism where the individuals with a history in criminal activities are the potential target. This media platform brings a completely different view from the others; it has stated, “the vast majority of state and local law enforcement agencies have embraced secure communities enthusiastically”. In addition, according to their research it was evident that racial profiling was not true but an argument that was developed due to the dominance of particular races in criminal activities. (PR Newswire 1). The media has continued to carry out intensive research on the developments in the program and hence keeping the population up to date with what is trending as far as the implementation of the program is concerned. They have based their reports from the Federal agencies such as the Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In addition, other non-governmental platforms have aided in providing credible and reliable information that has been important in providing the public with verifiable information. According to the reports by the media a lot of consistency is identifiable, from the historical perspective to the developments at designated times, the reports shows a good pattern. Some quarters of the media have developed deep criticism against the program. ‘The Daily Beast’ has termed it a reckless policy through one of its reputable reporter, Robert Morgenthau. He attacks the media on arguments that around only 14% of the total deportations were based on genuine claims of being engaged in criminal activities. He mentions that the policy will have negative implications towards reporting of criminal activities. He provides a solution that he believes will be beneficial to the federal government, that they give a leeway for the state to act in according to their preference (Morgenthau 1). The impact of these criticisms have been felt, the Hispanics have been empowered through the media reports hence have pushed the government to reform the policies. A report by the New York Times’ reporter Robert Pear shows that the Obama administration was pushed to repeal the policy because of the public pressure (Pear 1). The same report featured in several other media platforms including the British Broadcasting Corporation where they reported that over 300,000 deportation cases were to be reconsidered in the United States. In conclusion, the actual stand by the media has been shaky. They have taken both ends of the divide with some criticizing while others complementing the efforts by the Federal agency. However, despite the stands taken the media has objectively informed the public of what has been happening as far as the policy is concerned. The program as presented by the media was partially successful from the onset, an aspect that has been capitalized on by the media and the civil society to punch holes into it. Works Cited “Secure Communities by the Numbers, Revisited.” PR Newswire.Jun 18 2012. ProQuest. Web. 7 Dec. 2013 http://search.proquest.com/business/docview/1020835518/14232EBBAE258627376/4?accountid=45049  BBC,US will Review 300,000 Immigrant Deportation Cases. August 19, 2011.Web. 7 Dec. 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14585238 CNN, Report: Immigration Program Distracts Police, Destroys Trust. August 17, 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/08/16/immigration.program.protests/ Eng, James. US Citizen Sues Federal Government after being Wrongly Flagged as Deportable Immigrant under Secure Communities Program. NBC News. July 11, 2012. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/11/12665799-us-citizen-sues-federal-government-after-being-wrongly-flagged-as-deportable-immigrant-under-secure-communities-program Fei, Michelle. ‘Secure Communities’ and the U.S. Immigrant Rights Movement: Lessons from New York State. North American Congress on Latin America. July 11, 2012. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://nacla.org/blog/2012/7/11/secure-communities-and-us-immigrant-rights-movement-lessons-new-york-state Johnson, Alex. M. Cities, Counties can’t Stop Federal Immigration Checks. NBC News. October 15, 2010. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39576754/ns/us_news-security/#.UqNFPtIW0qQ Le, Van. New Orleans is Latest Jurisdiction to Step Away from Secure Communities. America’s Voice. August 13, 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://americasvoiceonline.org/blog/new-orleans-is-latest-jurisdiction-to-step-away-from-secure-communities/ Morgenthau, Robert. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is Latest to reject ‘Secure Communities’ Immigration Law. The Daily Beast. July 13, 2012. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/13/chicago-mayor-rahm-emanuel-is-latest-to-reject-secure-communities-immigration-law.html Pear, Robert. Fewer Youths to be Deported in New Policy. The New York Times. August 18, 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/19/us/19immig.html?_r=2&ref=us& Shore, Elena. DHS Releases Two Reports on Secure Communities. New America Media. April 6, 2012. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://newamericamedia.org/2012/04/dhs-releases-two-reports-on-secure-communities.php Tamara, E. Secure Communities Program arrested US Citizens: Report.Huffingtonpost. December 14, 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/15/secure-communities-us-citizens-arrested_n_1150877.html Read More