Cable news caricatures immigration issue with ubiquitous footage of border-crossers
SUMMARY: A Media Matters analysis found that April 9 reports about immigration policy on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News frequently featured footage of people apparently crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally. The footage distorts the issue; it does not address in any meaningful way the reality of their lives or the nation's challenges in dealing with the issue.
On April 9, following a New York Times report that President Obama "plans to begin addressing the country's immigration system this year" and will seek a path for undocumented immigrants to become legal residents, Media Matters for America reviewed coverage of the issue that day by CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News, all of which aired numerous reports on immigration policy. Consistent with a frequent and long-standing practice, these reports frequently featured footage of people apparently crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally -- jumping border fences, hiking through the desert, or being pursued or detained by law-enforcement officials in what appears to be the vicinity of border. The ubiquitous use of this footage as a visual backdrop distorts the issue: The footage does not in any meaningful way illustrate the reality of the lives of immigrants who are in this country illegally, nor does it meaningfully depict the complex array of issues involved in immigration reform. Moreover, the footage does not even capture the common experience of undocumented immigrants, nearly half of whom, according to a Pew Hispanic Center report, entered the country legally.
The following CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News teasers and segments on immigration reform included footage of immigrants apparently crossing the U.S.-Mexico border or being pursued or detained by law-enforcement officials in what appears to be the vicinity of border:
|
Start time (ET) |
Channel |
Program |
Type of segment |
|
5:28 p.m. |
CNN |
The Situation Room |
report |
|
7:07 p.m. |
CNN |
Lou Dobbs Tonight |
report |
|
6:06 a.m. |
FNC |
Fox & Friends |
discussion |
|
6:50 a.m. |
FNC |
Fox & Friends |
teaser |
|
6:54 a.m. |
FNC |
Fox & Friends |
discussion |
|
8:37 a.m. |
FNC |
Fox & Friends |
discussion |
|
5:01 p.m. |
FNC |
Glenn Beck |
teaser |
|
9:19 a.m. |
MSNBC |
MSNBC Live |
teaser |
|
9:25 a.m. |
MSNBC |
MSNBC Live |
discussion |
|
10:42 a.m. |
MSNBC |
MSNBC Live |
discussion |
|
11:09 a.m. |
MSNBC |
MSNBC Live |
teaser |
|
11:20 a.m. |
MSNBC |
MSNBC Live |
report |
|
12:20 p.m. |
MSNBC |
MSNBC Live |
discussion |
|
5:01 p.m. |
MSNBC |
Hardball |
teaser |
|
6:13 p.m. |
MSNBC |
The Ed Show |
teaser |
|
6:18 p.m. |
MSNBC |
The Ed Show |
discussion |
The segments featured the following images:
why doesn't mmfa report on CNN's immigration coverage yesterday on the Roland Martin show, when the on screen graphic read "Splitting up Families", why not report on how that is so disingenuos and biased towards the open border crowd. Where is that in your discussion mmfa? Left that out. No family is being split up, that is a ridiculous argument. If someone is deported and doesn't want their family split up, take them with you.
You really don't understand MMfA's mission statement, do you? Could you please read it again, this time for comprehension?
if a little fairness and objectivity threatens you, too bad.
You really don't understand MMfA's mission statement, do you? etrw
That's not all he doesn't understand...
i understand that injecting the other side to most of you liberals here is met with "read the mission statement". don't be threatened, you still outnumber the conservative here by a huge margin, so you must take some comfort in that.
Threatened? Never. Not like at MRC. That crowd just LOVES when someone "injects the other side".
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, move on back to freeperville.
"The footage does not in any meaningful way illustrate the reality of the lives of immigrants who are in this country illegally". And what would that be, that they are somehow victims for choosing to break our immigration laws?
Yes James. That is exactly what MMFA wants to show. They are the criminals and they are victims. Thats the way the dems work. We need to have the media there getting their life stories and explaning why America is so bad and evil for not letting them in.
Meanwhile in reality...
They are not criminals until they cross the border illegally. Before and after they cross the border, they remain economically destitute residents of a nation stricken with violence, crime, corruption, lack of opportunity and income disparity. America is not evil, but a great many Americans are also criminals for providing a seemingly endless supply of illegal employment for them.
And, of course, they come here because they can get jobs, often at large corporations. Where is your outrage at those hiring them? They are equally guilty.
How come these networks never show white Canadians moving across the border?
because everyone concerned about the influx of illegal immigrant into this country for a host of reasons just hate Mexicans and are all racists. Is that the answer that you like to silence the debate?
No one wants to silence the debate Only to have it be a more thoughtful one.
Not everyone against the illegals is a racist but enough of them are. The media and the government have institutionalized racism going back to the times of the industrial revolution.
We've been conditioned to blame those different than ourselves for our problems rather than to find out who is really responsible.
How about focusing on the word ILLEGAL for a change? In NO country in the world, except for us, would there be any debate about people illegally entering their domains. The vast majority of anti-illegal-immigration people are NOT racists- it's a matter of law and well being for the citizens already here. The problem compounds when illegals who are caught comitting crimes are allowed to stay here and keep on doing it. The family that was "executed" in San Francisco last year is a good example of that. My heart goes out to that woman who lost her entire family to a gunman illegally here, who had been caught before in felony crime and still allowed her to take it to that point. It's not the only example of this, and the problem is far greater than just crime. California spends untold amounts of money on welfare, medical etc for illegals and now the state is broke and seeking federal funds which means the whole country pays for California's practices.
You peopel pick fly crap out of pepper making an issue over these pictures. What does it matter if they jump a fence, dig a tunnel or get hauled in the box of a tractor trailer? they're here, they're illegally here, and the "undocumented" (a word the left loves in liew of "illegal") aspect simply means there's no control, no means to deal with the problem and it's getting worse, especially with the drug cartelproblem on the border. Why dont' you people just wake up and realize that your impractical, and unrealistic clinging to your kool-aidinduced ideology is the country's problem?
those that some blanket racism only want to silence the debate. I should not have to defend my position because of some racists within the anti-illegal immigration movement, of course there are some, but to arbitrarily say "enough of them are" accomplishes nothing except a desire to shut down debate and cry racism. It's sleazy
Because there are no forces of supply and demand driving white Canadians across the border in huge numbers to find work in the US.
there is really nothing being "reformed". it's an amnesty, just like the one in 1986, except now we have five times [or more] the number of people here illegally. it is similar in the fact that there will be no enforcement, because there will be the usual bluster of passing "strict enforcement", and the money will not be provided for that, and then we'll just hear the same reasons in five years why we need another amnesty. it's just an encouragement.
there's a simple way to do workplace enforcement. it's called e-verify. when you apply for a job, they e mail your social security number to a central sysytem. if someone is already using that number or if there is a no match, then you have to prove it's yours. you don't get fired, you have a certain time to validate your number. if you are here legally, but not born here, you have a resident card. there are some mistakes, but generally it works. it's the democrats who have really held up passing it as a requirement, although some states require it now. and not all the hate speech belongs to one side. not when you have congressmen calling the border patrol gestapo.
I think the footage was appropriate. Illegal invaders from Mexico and other places are breaking the law. I don't think our forefathers would have wanted 14+ million illegal occupiers in this country. It's not good for the economy, crime, employment, homeland security, gang violence, drug activity, overcrowding in classrooms, language barriers and resentment by LEGAL immigrants that did what was right to become legitimate U.S. citizens. Whatever it is that democrats gain for sticking up for these criminals is ruining the country. Is it hopes of gaining new voters? Is it greed by multinational corporations to obtain cheap labor? Just curious: when does overpopulation become an issue like global warming? Where are all these invaders going to live if they keep coming at the rate they are coming? Have any of you been on a Los Angeles freeway lately?
I am not trying to pick a fight. I really want to know what liberals have to gain for supporting law breaking border crossers.
Nobody is "supporting law breaking". Trying to find effective solutions to the problem is what I support, not knee-jerk unreasonable positions like arrest them all and send them back or build a big, expensive ineffective fence.
Something along the lines of employer/employee verification/oversight. But then that would mean the government would have to get involved, and we all know the government can't do anything right.
You're generalizing all liberals as supporters of breaking the law. As a liberal myself, I do not support breaking the law, but I do support doing something about the forces of supply and demand that are driving the constant violations of the law. It's not a question of what I have to gain by supporting such solutions, it's a question of what all the people of both countries have to gain.
My turn to generalize...
I really want to know what conservatives have to gain by ignoring the forces of supply and demand and instead focusing on border security, pouring all the resources into stopping and rounding up those who cross illegally, only to have them keep trying to cross the border over and over again until they are finally successful.
I for one am 100% supportive of holding the businesses liable under the law for hiring illegal labor. I mean serious economic penalties, not slaps on the wrists.
most of us are. Except that liberals use that all the time when defending their open border positions. Those that don't want the employer punished have no more interest in securing our borders than the most egregious open border advocate around.
defending their open border positions
You're so predicatble. And so wrong.
wrong? I'd suggest you wake up. how many times are those who want strict border enforcement told "why are you so unoncerned about employers and cracking down on them"? those who aren't concerned about employer crackdowns, mostly Wall Street Journal rightwingers, are no better than those who aren't concerned about "open borders", mostly leftist organizations and liberal politicians.
as an example see this from historygeek just above "And, of course, they come here because they can get jobs, often at large corporations. Where is your outrage at those hiring them? They are equally guilty"
"Except that liberals use that all the time when defending their open border positions."
Again with the ridiculous generalizations and pigeonholing.
I don't have an "open" border position. I have a realistic border position.
It's 2,000 miles you're hoping to seal off as a remedy for illegal immigration. That's not realistic. Try to seal the border, and the coyotes are only going to get more creative and the immigrants will only keep trying to cross over and over again until they are successful because the lure of jobs is so great.
We have an illegal employer problem in this country. If illegal immigrants have no jobs waiting for them here, they simply will not come here or remain here in numbers anywhere close to what's happening right now. Then, perhaps, there will finally be the will in Mexico to do something about the problems that drive them to come here.
"I don't think our forefathers would have wanted 14+ million illegal occupiers in this country."
Agreed. They owned slaves. Those are free. "Illegal occupiers" charge for their services.
Also L.A. freeways have been parking lots for decades, long before the "illegal invaders" invaded. I'm not trying to pick a fight. I really want to know what "conservatives" have to gain by obstructing every little bit of change, especially immigration reform.
it's true that los angeles freeways have always been crowded. but the "rush hour" extends now from early in the morning until nine or after in the evening. i know people who have spent time there and they talk about taking an hour and a half to go twenty miles. it's common sense. the more people you have in an area, the more people on the roads.
and could you tell me what is being reformed?
exactly, there is no reform, that is just code for amnesty.
As collateral damage, violent crimes against the latino population are up 40%, per the FBI. American citizens have been deported to Mexico and not allowed to return for years.
I look to our current administration to work on the real causes of this problem.