Effects of Ideology, News Source, and Geography on the Medias Framing of Immigrants - Research Paper Example

April 27, Effects of Ideology, News Source, and Geography on the Media’s Framing of Immigrants The public debate on immigration in general and immigration rights in particular has ebbed and flowed, depending on the media coverage and political action for or against it, among other factors. By “the media,” the paper refers to “mass media,” which includes cable and non-cable news, as well as different forms of print and radio media. The paper does not assume that the media is monolithic, however, as it recognizes the diversity of sources of news and information and how media organization covers them. The media has a tremendous effect on contributing to and reflecting public sentiments about immigration in the United States, largely because of how it frames arguments around the latter (Fryberg et al. 3) and people’s selective media consumption (de Zúñiga, Correa, and Valenzuela 599). Framing pertains to “the way that an argument is packaged… so as to make accessible and encourage a particular interpretation of a given issue” (Fryberg et al. 3). The media has a significant role in affecting the public debate of immigration through its framing and slanting of news about it, although political ideology, exposure to different sources of news, and geographic location affects the framing perspective and public sentiments on immigration also. The media affects current immigration issues through its different ways of controlling information, as it builds and contributes to the formation of civil society through the informatization of the world. In reality, numerous news and media content compete for media coverage, and immigration is only one of many possible everyday topics. The media has the power to decide which topics to cover, how it can cover it, and how many times it can cover it, although their coverage also depends on what the public wants or what politicians what to talk about in the news (Fryberg et al. 3; Hayes 1). Some scholars have already noted that the media has become powerful in shaping civil society through influencing the availability of and access to different content of news and information. In Social History of the Media Asa Briggs and Peter Burke describe the rise of the information age, which evolved from the printing press to the radios and television to the electronic and digital media. They note the informatization of civil society, as people in power and related to them understand that “[c]ontrol of information…would be the essence of wealth and power in the future” (Briggs and Burke 232). Whoever holds sources of data of whatever form has the power to sway the public opinion. Valentino, Brader, and Jardina are concerned of how media “racial priming” affects public opinions on immigrants and their rights. They assert that racial priming can reflect ethnocentricism in the media, or “preference for and positive affect toward one’s ethnic or racial group relative to all other” (Valentino et al. 150). Ethnocentric news, in particular, raises negative public sentiments against immigrants by focusing on stereotyped images of them as lazy or illegal (foreign, or Other), and dependent on state welfare (a burden to the American economy) (Valentino et al. 151). Journalism canon asserts the responsibility of the media in being impartial by showing all sides of issues using balanced coverage and unbiased language, because its duty is not to control public opinion, but to inform it, although reality shows a shift in media patterns regarding issue framing. Different variables can affect the way that the media reports immigration issues, however, beginning with political ideology, which affects its framing of the immigration issue. As mentioned, journalism should be impartial, but reality shows that the boundaries between media opinion and reporting are already blurred, with many media personalities becoming quite open about the political ideology. Political ideology refers to the body of political doctrines, beliefs, myths, and other constructs that guide how people within specific groups understand and respond to certain public issues. In the U.S., the main political ideologies are Republican and Democrat ideologies, although people are not neatly divided between Democrats and Republicans alone. Republicans are known to be more supportive of stricter immigration policies than Democrats. The news may not have strong effects on Republicans if they are reporting positive images of immigrants and the audiences already have a strongly negative view of them. de Zúñiga et al. studied the connection between selective exposure to cable news, political ideology, and sentiments about immigration in the U.S. using a web-based survey. They learned that selective exposure to the news exists where people prefer watching the news that reflect their political ideologies, in particular: “conservative Republicans are more likely to watch FOX News and less likely to watch CNN than liberal Democrats who, in turn, are more likely to watch CNN and less likely to watch FOX News” (de Zúñiga et al. 610). FOX News shows more anti-immigration framing more than CNN news, and people who receive negative news about immigrants reinforce or cause negative opinions about immigration (de Zúñiga et al. 610). The media is not as fair as it should be when framing immigration, which can reinforce political ideologies against it and reproduce negative public views of immigrants. Aside from political ideology, the news agency also has a strong effect on shaping public opinion, especially when they are already biased for or against immigration by slanting the news. Regina P. Branton and Johanna Dunaway assessed media coverage of immigration and immigration-related issues through content analysis of California newspaper coverage of immigration from March 1, 2004 to March 1, 2005, resulting to 1,227 news stories on immigration. They learned that news organizations that are corporate-owned media tend to show a negative view of immigrants that can cause or reinforce negative views on immigrants more than privately owned media (Branton and Dunaway 268). Danny Hayes and Stephanie A. Fryberg et al. report about media frames that slant the news toward certain negative views of immigrants, such as the law enforcement frame, which reports that many immigrants are criminals who must be deported; security/terrorism frame, which asserts that immigration is a means for terrorism; economic frame, which underlines that immigrants are threats to American jobs and have public costs to taxpayers; and civil rights frame, which argues that immigrants have human rights that should prevent racial profiling and racism against their right to work and live in the U.S. A terrorist frame can be particularly harmful to negative racial stereotypes, as experienced after the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., where the media has generally reported on the news in ways that promoted fear against Arabs and Muslims. Mussarat Khan and Kathryn Ecklund report about the media framing of 9/11 perpetrators that promoted negative images of Muslim and Middle Eastern immigrants that affected them. Nevertheless, the news may also present positive aspects of immigrants, such as through civil rights and how immigration is also good for the country. News coverage of the Dream Act, for instance, which allows undocumented immigrants to study or serve the military in the U.S., can improve immigration rights. Media frames and slants can reflect and spread either positive or negative views on immigrants through the sources of news. Besides the source of news, the location of the news or the audience can also have an impact on how immigration issues are reported. Studies showed that those news agencies near the borders tend to have a more negative view of immigration. The “imbalance” in information can shape civil society’s response to the frames and to immigration in general (Asa and Burke 230). Branton and Dunaway learned that news near the U.S.-Mexico border tend to have negative frames about immigrants, which Valentino et al. confirmed where geographic location affects media frames on immigration. The farther from the border and the more liberal news papers are, the more that they present immigrants in a positive light, such as their contribution to the economy and their embodiment of the American Dream, especially when they reflect what they think is more positive public views on immigrants (Branton and Dunaway 268; Fryberg et al. 9; Hayes 14). These studies prove that geography can be a reflection of how the media reflects and controls how and what the public thinks about immigration. The media is now far from the balanced and impartial institution that it used to be, as political ideology, kind of organization, and location affects its media frames of immigration issues. Though it can present positive frames of immigrants, it can also promote negative stereotypes by framing the threats that immigrants pose to American civil society and how they have become a burden to the economy. Positive and negative media coverage may have different opinion effects, depending still on the political ideologies of the public and the news agencies they subscribe to. Thus, the media is a powerful source of information and cause of public opinion toward immigration issues. Works Cited Branton, Regina P., and Johanna Dunaway. “Slanted Newspaper Coverage of Immigration: The Importance of Economics and Geography.” Policy Studies Journal 37.2 (2009): 257-273. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Briggs, Asa, and Peter Burke. Social History of the Media: From Gutenberg to the Internet. 3rd ed. Malden, MA: Polity, 2009. Print. Fryberg, Stephanie A., Stephens, Nicole M., Covarrubias, Rebecca, Markus, Hazel Rose, Carter, Erin D., Laiduc, Giselle A., and Ana J. Salido. “How the Media Frames the Immigration Debate: The Critical Role of Location and Politics.” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (2011): 1-17. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Gil de Zúñiga, Homero, Correa, Teresa, and Sebastian Valenzuela. “Selective Exposure to Cable News and Immigration in the U.S.: The Relationship Between FOX News, CNN, and Attitudes Toward Mexican Immigrants.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56.4 (2012): 597-615. Academic Search Premier. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Hayes, Danny. “Media Frames and the Immigration Debate.” Institute for the Study of the Judiciary, Politics, and the Media at Syracuse University. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Khan, Mussarat, and Kathryn Ecklund. “Attitudes Toward Muslim Americans Post-9/11.” Journal of Muslim Mental Health 7.1 (2012): 1-16. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Valentino, Nicholas A., Brader, Ted, and Ashley E. Jardina. “Immigration Opposition Among U.S. Whites: General Ethnocentrism or Media Priming of Attitudes About Latinos?” Political Psychology 34.2 (2013): 149-166. Academic Search Premier. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Read More