How did Arizona Become the 'Show Me Your Papers
State'? History and Media Provide Some Clues
State'? History and Media Provide Some Clues
By Dr. Celeste González de Bustamante - Op-Ed
Tucson, Arizona May 16, 2010 - The Grand Canyon State is now the "Show Me Your Papers State." For
the majority of Arizonans and Americans that's just fine.
Polls reveal widespread support among the general public for the state's controversial immigration law,
SB 1070. The law requires that police determine an individual's immigration status during a lawful stop,
detention, or arrest. Yet to many citizens (the author included), the law runs contrary to our nation's
democratic principles. So why is there so much support for this type of legislation? History and the media
provide some clues.
My research on local news coverage of undocumented migration in the 1970s and 1980s shows that
television and newspapers fomented negative stereotypes regarding Mexican undocumented migrants.
TV reporters portrayed undocumented people in two ways: as criminals, and as threats to the economy
and nation.
In visual terms, TV news reporters consistently painted so-called "job stealers" and "criminals" as a
destitute anonymous mass. File footage of unnamed men being rounded up and loaded into Border
Patrol vans often included the only images of Latinos that viewers saw in an entire newscast. For the
most part, the individual stories of undocumented men and women were not aired.
TV journalists reported that Mexican workers were "coming in droves," and uncritically allowed the
Tucson Sector chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, Herb Walsh, to claim it was a "silent invasion."
Journalists gave voice to people like David Duke, former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, who set up
camp in Douglas in 1977 along with fellow Klansmen who "intend to detain the illegal aliens until
authorities can be notified to their whereabouts."
In contrast, Latinos who were in the country legally and contributing positively to society remained off
the small and big screens. Hollywood and network television have a long history of writing ethnic
minorities out of screenplays - especially Mexicans and Mexican-Americans.
The historic and repeated silencing of some voices, and emphasizing of others had two damaging effects:
Viewers and readers received a skewed version of reality; news consumers accepted that version of
reality as fact, which inevitably helped shape their opinions about immigrants and immigration.
Some of those viewers and readers included the politicians who penned and signed SB 1070 into law, as
well as dozens of other anti-immigrant measures.
Unlike those in the late 20th century, today's reporters are not so blatantly biased. But they still have
shortcomings. Journalists covering immigration rely too heavily on government sources to tell their
stories, thereby omitting those directly affected by the issue. Too often journalists conflate the issues of
undocumented migration and drug smuggling. They are two distinct phenomena.
When a Pinal County sheriff's deputy was shot on April 30, reporters announced that the individual
responsible was an "illegal immigrant" instead of a suspected drug smuggler. The result? The public saw
the following equation: undocumented = criminal = drug smuggler.
Finally, today's news media often posit problems such as immigration in a bipolar way, ignoring the
complexity of the issue, as well as the majority of perspectives that fall between two extremes.
Presenting immigration as a simple two-sided issue fuels divisiveness, contributes to hatemongering and
hinders possibilities for reform.
At a time when the vast majority of people rely on television and mass communications for information,
members of the media should recognize the connections between the media and public opinion, and
remember that the failures of journalists and entertainment producers have real consequences.
The OP-ED was originally published in The Arizona Daily Star.
the majority of Arizonans and Americans that's just fine.
Polls reveal widespread support among the general public for the state's controversial immigration law,
SB 1070. The law requires that police determine an individual's immigration status during a lawful stop,
detention, or arrest. Yet to many citizens (the author included), the law runs contrary to our nation's
democratic principles. So why is there so much support for this type of legislation? History and the media
provide some clues.
My research on local news coverage of undocumented migration in the 1970s and 1980s shows that
television and newspapers fomented negative stereotypes regarding Mexican undocumented migrants.
TV reporters portrayed undocumented people in two ways: as criminals, and as threats to the economy
and nation.
In visual terms, TV news reporters consistently painted so-called "job stealers" and "criminals" as a
destitute anonymous mass. File footage of unnamed men being rounded up and loaded into Border
Patrol vans often included the only images of Latinos that viewers saw in an entire newscast. For the
most part, the individual stories of undocumented men and women were not aired.
TV journalists reported that Mexican workers were "coming in droves," and uncritically allowed the
Tucson Sector chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, Herb Walsh, to claim it was a "silent invasion."
Journalists gave voice to people like David Duke, former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, who set up
camp in Douglas in 1977 along with fellow Klansmen who "intend to detain the illegal aliens until
authorities can be notified to their whereabouts."
In contrast, Latinos who were in the country legally and contributing positively to society remained off
the small and big screens. Hollywood and network television have a long history of writing ethnic
minorities out of screenplays - especially Mexicans and Mexican-Americans.
The historic and repeated silencing of some voices, and emphasizing of others had two damaging effects:
Viewers and readers received a skewed version of reality; news consumers accepted that version of
reality as fact, which inevitably helped shape their opinions about immigrants and immigration.
Some of those viewers and readers included the politicians who penned and signed SB 1070 into law, as
well as dozens of other anti-immigrant measures.
Unlike those in the late 20th century, today's reporters are not so blatantly biased. But they still have
shortcomings. Journalists covering immigration rely too heavily on government sources to tell their
stories, thereby omitting those directly affected by the issue. Too often journalists conflate the issues of
undocumented migration and drug smuggling. They are two distinct phenomena.
When a Pinal County sheriff's deputy was shot on April 30, reporters announced that the individual
responsible was an "illegal immigrant" instead of a suspected drug smuggler. The result? The public saw
the following equation: undocumented = criminal = drug smuggler.
Finally, today's news media often posit problems such as immigration in a bipolar way, ignoring the
complexity of the issue, as well as the majority of perspectives that fall between two extremes.
Presenting immigration as a simple two-sided issue fuels divisiveness, contributes to hatemongering and
hinders possibilities for reform.
At a time when the vast majority of people rely on television and mass communications for information,
members of the media should recognize the connections between the media and public opinion, and
remember that the failures of journalists and entertainment producers have real consequences.
The OP-ED was originally published in The Arizona Daily Star.
DIVISIVENESS Today's news
media often posit problems such as
immigration in a bipolar way,
ignoring the complexity of the issue,
as well as the majority of
perspectives that fall between two
extremes.
Photo by Eduardo Barraza/Barriozona
media often posit problems such as
immigration in a bipolar way,
ignoring the complexity of the issue,
as well as the majority of
perspectives that fall between two
extremes.
Photo by Eduardo Barraza/Barriozona
Celeste González de Bustamante, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at University of Arizona School
of Journalism and Center for Latin American Studies in Tucson, Arizona, where she teaches
television news and conducts research on media history of the US-Mexico border and Latin
America. She has 15 years of experience as a journalist in public and commercial television in
California and Arizona. Dr. González de Bustamante is a third generation American.
E-mail: celesteg@email.arizona.edu
of Journalism and Center for Latin American Studies in Tucson, Arizona, where she teaches
television news and conducts research on media history of the US-Mexico border and Latin
America. She has 15 years of experience as a journalist in public and commercial television in
California and Arizona. Dr. González de Bustamante is a third generation American.
E-mail: celesteg@email.arizona.edu
Published by the Hispanic Institute of Social Issues in Phoenix, Arizona
|
| HISTORY IS ABOUT TO CHANGE Grassroots Journalism |
