“they’re not sending their best:”
TRANSCRIPT
“THEY’RE NOT SENDING THEIR BEST:”
A LOOK AT TRUMP RHETORIC IN SELECTION OF NEWS MEDIA &
THE IMPACT ON PUBLIC SENTIMENT & PERCEPTIONS OF
MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS
IN HAWAI‘I
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF
MASTER OF COMMUNICATIONS
May 2021
By
Leslie Betancourt Vallejano
Thesis Committee:
Wayne Buente, Chairperson
Rachel Neo
Hanae Kramer
Francis S. Dalisay
ii
Abstract
The past four years of the political climate in the United States has been an interesting
one, to say the least. After the 2016 political election, the study of public perceptions on
immigration has extensively increased especially in relation to bipartisan media selection.
However, much of the research has evolved from the U.S. mainland and very little for the state
of Hawai‘i. This study aims to understand how residents of Hawai‘i engage in selection of news
media using selective avoidance and selective exposure as a theoretical background. Further, the
study examines whether exposure or avoidance to conservative news media affects immigration
sentiment and perceptions of Mexican immigrants on Hawai‘i residents. Hypotheses were tested
through a mixed-method approach using Qualtrics and inductive coding where 35 respondents on
the island of O’ahu were surveyed.
Keywords: selective avoidance, selective exposure, news media, mediated politics, sentiment,
perceptions, immigrants, immigration
iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to extend my sincere gratitude and appreciation to my thesis committee. To Dr.
Buente for his guidance, patience, and suggestions throughout this process. I extend my
acknowledgements to Dr. Neo, Dr. Kramer, and Dr. Dalisay whose expertise and knowledge
also made this possible. Thank you all for not only being amazing members of this committee,
but for being amazing professors throughout my undergraduate and graduate journey. With that
said, thank you to the School of Communication at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa for this
wonderful opportunity.
To my sisters:
Thank you for always being my cheerleaders and for pushing me to be a better person.
Para mis padres,
Que gracias a su apoyo, esfuerzos y sacrificions, nada de esto hubiese sido posible. Llegaron a
un país sin nada pero nos has dado todo a mi y a mis hermanas. Estoy tan orgullosa de ser hija
de dos inmigrantes Mexicanos, por eso les dedico este proyecto.
Y como solemos decir:
¡SI SE PUDO!
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. .ii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... iii
List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................1
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................3
Trump’s Rhetoric Against a Nation ...............................................................................3
Trump vs. Mexican Immigrants ...............................................................................4
Media Effects .................................................................................................................6
Representation of Mexicans in Media ....................................................................7
Hawai‘i & U.S. Politics ..............................................................................................10
Rainbow of Cultures – Mexicans in Hawai‘i ........................................................11
Media Attitudes in the Trump Era ..............................................................................12
CHAPTER III: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...........................................................14
Selective Exposure ......................................................................................................14
Selective Avoidance ....................................................................................................15
Partisan Media Selection .......................................................................................16
Hypotheses ..................................................................................................................17
CHAPTER IV: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................18
Design .........................................................................................................................18
Procedure ....................................................................................................................18
Study Sample ..............................................................................................................19
Measures .....................................................................................................................19
Independent Variables ..........................................................................................20
Dependent Variables .............................................................................................22
Control Variables ..................................................................................................23
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................24
CHAPTER V: RESULTS .................................................................................................25
CHAPTER VI: DISCUSSION .........................................................................................30
v
CHAPTER VII: CONCLUSION ......................................................................................37
LIST OF REFERENCES ...................................................................................................41
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................46
A. Survey Questions ..................................................................................................46
B. Thematic Coding ...................................................................................................51
C. Consent Form ........................................................................................................53
vi
List of Tables
Table 1 ..............................................................................................................................19
Table 2 ..............................................................................................................................25
1
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best…”
“Build that Wall!”
Slogans, such as the above, became the epitome of the presidential campaign in 2016.
After Trump’s 2016 campaign, the study of public perceptions and anti-immigration sentiments
have extensively increased with time. Scholars have found out that the media, in fact, can have
an effect on the public’s perception about political topics, in this case, immigration. Many of
these scholars have mainly focused on participants residing on the U.S. mainland. Furthermore,
little research has attempted to understand whether the media and Trump’s anti-(Mexican)
immigrant rhetoric has had an effect on Americans that do not see themselves directly or closely
affected by Mexican immigration.
There is no doubt that the media has become an important factor in any presidential
election; from the Obama administration to Trump’s extensive front-page stories. Trump is a
unique case in the annals of American Presidents when it comes to his relationship with the
media (Thompson, 2020). Media has played a crucial role in the way we acquire and process
information we are exposed to. With the rise of the internet, the navigation of information has
become effortlessly easier to reach audiences across the globe. And because of his views on
Mexican immigrants, Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric has reached millions and continues to
increase. Due to this exposure, his views have been able to affect the way others view Mexicans,
no doubt.
2
However, it appears that literature falls short in exploring the consequences of media
choice and audience selectivity for public opinion formation on issues of great importance (Gil de
Zúñiga, Correa, Valenzuela, 2012, p. 598). Therefore, this study hopes to contribute to existing
literature by understanding how ideological predispositions and news media selection associate with
perceptions of Mexican immigrants and sentiment on immigration while taking a look at the attitudinal
consequences of theories like selective exposure and selective avoidance.
Having the study take place in a state like Hawai‘i is of interest due to its long Democratic
standing, cultural diversity, and more importantly, filled with the Aloha spirit!
3
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
Context - Trump’s Rhetoric against a Nation
The 2016 elections were like something we had never seen before. For the first time, in
my years of voting, we were able to see a presidential campaign supplement such divisive
sentiment towards particular groups of society. The most known display being his discourse
about Mexican immigrants; “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best…,”
along with his allegations about Mexican immigrants being rapists and drug importers. The
discussion on illegal immigration has always been a divisive topic in political sectors but is
usually never the central issue the way Trump framed it during his politics. Since his election,
there has been an increased and consistent enmity towards those of Mexican descent, from the
shouting of “build that wall” to the 2019 El Paso shooting.
On June 16, 2015, the world of politics took a big turn. On this day, an official statement
by Donald Trump went out to the public announcing his position as a presidential candidate for
the 2016 elections. Before these elections, Trump was predominantly known within popular
culture for being a businessman and a television personality. Records show Trump’s personal
involvement with politics through candidate endorsements, monetary donations, and public
promotion of his policy preferences for decades (Haberman & Burns, 2016); [Trump] has also
run for office multiple times starting in 2000 when he first campaigned for the US presidency
and won two Reform Party primaries (Flores, 2018, p. 1653). As preliminaries progressed,
Trump went on to defeat 16 other candidates in the primaries as the Republican presidential
candidate. Although losing the popular vote, he was elected president over Democratic nominee,
Hillary Clinton.
4
Both the 2016 presidential campaign and the election of Donald Trump have
supplemented a divisive sentiment toward immigration and immigrants which has further pushed
the ideology that Mexicans are the enemy. Even though the focus of this research is Mexican
immigrants, I believe it is pivotal to shine light on other immigrant groups that have been under
his condescension. For example, the “Muslim ban,” where during his campaign, Trump had
called for an end to the admittance of Muslim refugees, arguing they were ‘a rich pool of
potential recruiting targets for Islamic terror groups’ (Romero, 2018, p. 39). The ban consisted of
people from Yemen, Iran, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, and Syria. But racial attacks on Trump’s
behalf are nothing new; he has publicly attacked former president, Barack Obama, accusing him
of not being born in the United States. No other presidential candidates in the 2016 campaign
had immigration a central issue (Sanneh, 2015 as cited in Flores, 2018) nor the forefront topic of
their political campaign the way Trump did.
Trump vs. Mexican Immigrants
Right from the start of his candidacy announcement, Trump made it clear that Mexico
and its people were one of his biggest foes. His past speeches have stated his objective of
deporting millions of illegal immigrants, half of them being of Mexican descent, and has
threatened to end NAFTA, North American Free Trade Agreement (The Economist, 2016); now
known as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) as of July 1, 2020. Moreover,
he has repeatedly assured the American people that Mexico would be responsible for paying the
southern border wall that would be keeping immigrants out. As Santamaría (2017) states, “the
assumptions underlying the ‘Build That Wall!’ declarative is that America is under siege by
‘radical Islamic terrorists,’ Mexican ‘rapists,’ and ‘bad hombres’ [Spanish for bad men], and
other ‘criminals’ intent on dismantling the core fabric of what makes ‘America Great’ (p. 1003).
5
Even though Trump singles out Mexican nationals throughout his campaign, he later notes in a
speech that such criminally‐prone immigrants are ‘coming from more than Mexico,’ stating that
immigrants come ‘from all over South and Latin America, and probably from the Middle East.
But we do not know because we have no protection and we have no competence’ (Bump,
Washington Post, 2015).
Before continuing, I believe it is important to point out that the process of this election
has caused a synchronization of Mexicans with immigrants, in particular, illegal immigrants; this
has caused a presumption with Trump supporters that people with Mexican and/or Latinx ethnic
backgrounds could potentially be illegal immigrants. Immediately after the election, there were
cases of people directing the wall chant at people they assumed were Mexican (Holley, 2016).
Furthermore, Trump’s comments on (Mexican) illegal immigration have pushed a political
agenda on immigration laws and building a new wall along the southern U.S. - Mexico border.
Safe to say, such rhetoric contributed to the initiation of the popular campaign slogans, “Build
the Wall” and “Make America Great Again.”
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re
not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that
have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems. They’re
bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime. They’re rapists and some, I
assume, are good people, but I speak to border guards and they’re
telling us what we’re getting.” (Trump Speech, 2015)
As the Republican candidate, Trump entered the immigration debate with invective
words, displayed above. Verea (2018) argues that Trump’s violent rhetoric, hate speech, and
continual bullying of Mexico and of Mexicans have caused irreparable damage to our already
deteriorated bilateral relationship (p. 198). Since the election of Trump, it has been clear that
6
there is an increased and consistent animosity towards this particular group of people. From the
shouting of “build that wall” to the 2019 El Paso shooting, described by The New York Times as
“the deadliest anti-Latino attack in recent U.S. history” (Murphy, 2019), where authorities later
stated that the shooting targeted people of Mexican descent.
Media Effects
Media, as defined by Singh and Pandey (2017), is the reflection of our society and it
depicts what and how society works. Media, whether it is printed, electronic or the web is the
only medium, which helps in making people informed. It also helps in entertaining the public,
educating and making people aware of the current happenings (p. 127). Since the invention of
mass communication technologies, the effects of media have been a very popular and heavily-
researched topic by communication scholars. For years we have been inflicted with ideologies or
products that try to tell us what to think or what to purchase, assuming that it is the best for the
consumer. As McQuail (1977) states, for the past 50 years, media have been attributed great
power to shape opinion and belief, change habits of life, and impose political systems (p. 9), as it
is still relevant today, all through the attractions of popular press, cinema, radio, television, and
the internet. Media has played a crucial role in the way we acquire and process information we
are exposed to. And with the rise of the internet, navigation of information has become
effortlessly easier to reach audiences across the globe. As Stromback & Esser (2009) state, “Our
knowledge or impressions of politicians, political issues, and people or places beyond our own
experiences comes primarily from the media” (p. 210). In the world of politics, media use has
been no exception in playing a role in which it influences the ways we may think and feel about
political spectrums, whether that be political topics such as issues, policies, candidates, etc.
7
As stated above, mediated communication in past decades came in the forms of radio,
newspaper, and years later was adopted by television. Now, in the past decade, politics has made
a significant shift from traditional media to new media or online media. From the elections of
2008, Barack Obama was able to change the ball game, to sort of say. His successful effort
demonstrated the central role of Twitter and other social platforms as integral parts of modern
political communication (Yang, Chen, Maity & Ferrera, 2016, p. 1). From this moment on,
attention for political figures and their online presence has amplified. Further, the way candidates
chose to reach their audiences shifted just as the same way audiences consume their news has
changed.
Mediated politics refers to the way politics is communicated via and experienced through
different media (Stromback & Esser, 2009, p. 208). Therefore, once politics have become
mediated, the public depends on the media to be their source of information. As we have
continued to argue, the way information is presented can have an effect on our views, with that
being public opinion and perceptions. The more popular recent view is that media influence is
significant, but only in shaping the problems the public considers most important (as cited in
Entman, 1989, p. 347). And as we see, the topic of immigration has been a long-discussed
matter, not only in the 2016 elections but in many previous elections.
Representation of Mexicans in Media
In his 1985 speech (a political debate for the 1986 congressional debate), Ronald Reagan
asserted that the U.S. had "lost control" of its borders to an "invasion" of illegal migrants; in
doing so, [Reagan] transformed undocumented immigration from a useful political issue into a
more fundamental question of national security (Durand, Massey, & Parrado, 1999, p. 521). This
eventually led immigrants to be associated with invaders, criminals, and drug smugglers; stigmas
8
that continue to this day. Dick (2019), from Arcadia University, shares that in the latter part of
the twentieth century, Mexican migrants received the mantle of migrant criminality, becoming
the focus of immigration crackdowns. And as of recent events, migrant criminality has come to
affect those of Latin American countries such as El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala (p. 179).
However, Donahue (2017), along with many other scholars, state that scholarly literature and
government data on the aggregate patterns of violent crime show that Latin American migrants
are far less likely than US citizens to commit such crimes (as cited in Dick, 2019, p. 181).
Conforming to The Mexico-U.S. Border in the American Imagination, by the 1980s, Mexican
migration has no longer been proportionately increasing, and in recent years it has often been at a
net-zero (Massey 2016).
Regardless of the statistics, in the context of crime, victimization, and immigration in the
United States, research shows that people are afraid of immigrants because they think
immigrants are a threat to their safety and engage in many violent personal and property crimes
(Bernat, 2019). In a study aimed at finding the criminally most dangerous and peaceful U.S.
states, Frohlich, Stebbins, and Sauter (2015) share that the states with the highest violent and
property crime rates are neither the most populous nor do they house the largest number of
immigrants. The states found with the highest reported crime rates were: Louisiana, Alabama,
Alaska, Tennessee, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Arkansas, Delaware, and Missouri
(Bernat, 2019, p. 4). In addition, the majority of arrestees in 2014 were found to be white (69%)
and male (73%) (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2015C). So, how do these stereotypes
become so flourished?
9
Subervi and colleagues (2005) note, studies have also found that [Latinos] are depicted
as a burden for society in issues related to illegality, crime, and affirmative action (as cited in Gil de
Zúñiga et al., 2012). According to Gil de Zúñiga et al. (2012), people’s views toward
immigrants and immigration are fed and shaped by the media (p. 602) and consistently
underrepresent and stereotype certain immigrant groups, especially Muslims and Latinos
(Correa, 2010). Nevertheless, the negative image of immigration in general and Mexican
immigration in particular, has pervaded the news media in general, including FOX News and
CNN (Cisneros, 2008). Yang et al. (2016) argue that the filter mass media perform when
selecting certain issues and portraying them frequently and prominently, leads people to perceive
those issues as more important than others (p. 4). In the topic of immigration, previous research
by Dunaway, Branton, and Abrajano (2010) found that heightened media coverage toward the
issue of immigration led to a stronger perception among the U.S. public that immigration was a
most important policy concern facing the nation (as cited in Dunaway et al., 2011, p. 5).
Moreover, politicians are skilled communicators who influence public opinion (Teven, 2008, p.
385) and if Mexican immigrants are represented as a threat, just as they were for Trump’s 2016
campaign and continue to be after the elections, then the public is more likely to adopt negative
attitudes toward this group of people, leading most of the time to exclusion from American
society.
The topic of Mexican immigration has been a predominant topic as of past and current
political priorities. As we saw in the 2016 elections, Donald Trump was very openly verbal about
his views on immigration and illegal immigrants, in particular about Mexican immigrants.
Similar to the views of immigrants in the mid-1980s, Trump was able to resort to an anti-
immigrant rhetoric awakening a dislike for Mexicans with name-calling propaganda such as drug
10
dealers, criminals, and rapists. And since taking office, Trump has continued such rhetoric
language, expanding his ideologies as no other president has done before.
According to Butz and Kehrberg (2019), contemporary scholars have begun studying
state-level variation in immigration policy adoptions; in particular, immigration population size
or Latino demographics are commonly used in extant studies of state immigration policies to
represent public opinion in the form of anti-immigrant sentiment. (p. 4) but no such study has
been seen in Hawai‘i. Additionally, this study claims that Trump’s rhetoric, with the help of the
media, can be widely spread and can cause effects on attitudes. Hawai‘i, in particular, is an
interesting location to focus on for a few reasons; (1) this state has been Democratic for many
years; and (2) the Mexican population is very minimal in comparison to other ethnic groups.
Hawai‘i & U.S. Politics
Dated back to 1898, it is the said date that the Hawaiian annexation by the U.S. took
place, allowing for an expansion of U.S. territory into the Pacific. Scholars, such as Osborne
(1981), state that some historians interpret the annexation of Hawai‘i as something related solely
for military purposes; other scholars like Appel (1954) state that the history of the Hawaiian
Islands’ involvement with the U.S. was due to labor problems. Furthermore, the U.S. Department
of State Archive (2009) shared that spurred by the nationalism aroused by the Spanish-American
War, the United States annexed Hawai‘i in 1898 at the urging of President William McKinley.
Due to the concerns from leaders in Washington that Hawai‘i might become part of a European
nation's empire, the official annexation of Hawai‘i took place in 1898 extending U.S. territory
into the Pacific.
11
Fast forward to 1900, Hawai‘i was named a U.S. territory; and in 1959, Alaska and
Hawai‘i were declared as part of the U.S. Since its admission to statehood, Hawai‘i has
participated in U.S. presidential elections. People born in the state of Hawai‘i are declared U.S.
citizens by birth and hold the same political rights as everyone else; voting rights feature the one
person-one vote. Hawaiian congressional politics has been dominated by the Democratic party
for years. The state has elected just one Republican U.S. senator and two GOP House members
(Bernstein, 2004). With the exception of 1972 and 1984, Hawai‘i has supported Democrats in
presidential elections. Nonetheless, Hawai‘i has been through a lot historically which has
allowed it to become culturally rich in many ways and the home to many ethnic groups for
centuries.
Rainbow of Cultures – Mexicans in Hawai‘i
There is no doubt that Hawai‘i is a unique melting pot and among the country's most
diverse states. In addition to its indigenous Hawaiian culture, its surrounding cultures include
North American, Southeast Asian, and East Asia. According to the World Population Review
(2021), due to its large percentage of Asians, Hawai‘i is the only state to have Asians as its
largest ethnic group, making it a majority-minority state. In addition, the state has the highest
percentage of multiracial residents than any other state; the White population is the smallest in
the state.
As of 2019, the Census states that Hispanics make up approximately 10.7% of the
population. At the time of the article, research published by the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa
reported that Hawai‘i now had 38,700 Mexican-origin residents, up to 165% from 14,600 in
1990. Furthermore, only a small number are unauthorized, representing 10 percent of the state's
12
estimated 40,000 unauthorized immigrants (Kaunānā, 2013). Overall indicating that the
Mexican-origin community is small yet growing.
Ultimately, despite Hawaii’s strong Democratic standing and welcoming attitude towards
immigrants, we have established that media representation of Mexicans immigrants and
immigration are not the best. Therefore, the questions are…how do residents of Hawai‘i perceive
this particular group? And…does the media play a part? More importantly, it would be
interesting to understand the way people in Hawai‘i approach selectivity of media content
because regardless of political affiliation or geographical location, almost everyone has the same
access to popular news outlets. But first, we should briefly discuss the relationship between
Trump and the media and how it could potentially have an effect on the way we approach our
selection of news.
Media Attitudes in the Trump Era
It has been known that Donald Trump is no stranger to the politics of media and very
knowledgeable about what the media’s purpose is for. His 2016 political campaign is notable,
not only for its rhetoric but for its way of using the media to its benefit. As Boczkowski and
Papacharissi (2018) argue in reference to Trump’s win in 2016, “there is a certain sense that the
media played an important role in this extraordinary turn of events. This applies both to the news
and social media individually, and even more so to the combination of them” (p. 1).
To a great extent, literature examining attitudes towards news media and the relationship
between media and politicians can be found, yet has become more prominent in the last few
years. Furthermore, it has been believed that the traditional framework states that political actors
try to garner positive media coverage to gain visibility and appeal to their core voter
13
constituencies (Thompson, 2020, p. 120). However, that ideology has shifted and only partly
explains the relationship between Trump and the media. Even though Trump can be considered a
media expert, it has been apparent that he and the media have been in a complicated
relationship.
From the disparaging of outlets like CNN and MSNBC, among others, it is apparent that
there is an effect in support of polarization with claims of “fake news.” As an example,
Thompson (2020) discusses that when Trump gives televised interviews, he tends to insert
himself into Republican-leaning and conservative echo-chambers such as Fox (p. 120). But why
is this important? In time, individuals perceive a particular news source to be more credible than
others and will grow to rely on this outlet, eventually increasing their exposure to news from this
source. This potentially enforces the act of engaging with like-minded information.
Such actions can create a level of distrust in the audiences, enforcing behaviors like
selective exposure or selective avoidance of news media. Regardless of the war between Trump
and the media, it is indisputable that the media has been crucial to his political success.
14
CHAPTER III: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Selective Exposure
Previously discussed, it is mentioned that when individuals perceive a particular news
source to be credible, they will grow to rely on this outlet, eventually increasing their exposure to
news from this source. Thompson (2020) argues that today’s American media audiences are
highly polarized and form part of “echo chambers” (p. 120). In other words, Americans tend to
engage or only consume media from outlets whose coverage reinforces their existing political
beliefs, also known as selective exposure.
The term selective exposure refers to the fact that “people tend to see and hear
communications that are favorable or congenial to their predispositions” (Berelson & Steiner,
1964, p. 529). Or as defined in Gil de Zúñiga et. al (2012), this concept refers to the process by
which people deliberately select information channels that match their predispositions and
beliefs (p. 599). This concept has long existed but has recently generated renewed interest since
rapid changes in media have occurred in the last two decades. As Bennett and Iyengar (2008)
explain, the multiplicity of online media channels and cable television and the reemergence of
partisan television and online outlets as popular sources of political information for large parts of
the electorate, have restored the relevance of the concept of [selective exposure] to
communication scholars.
Furthermore, it is argued that the preference behind selective exposure is “motivated
reasoning,” which explains that people are motivated to find information that confirms to what
they already believe (Nelson & Webster, 2017, p. 2). According to Chaffee and colleagues
(2001), because it is said that individuals tend to have stable political predispositions, selective
15
exposure is more likely to happen because political ideologies or partisanship is an accessible
shortcut to choose an information channel.
Selective Avoidance
Not much literature has been done focusing solely on the theory of selective avoidance
because it has always been described as just the opposite of what selective exposure stands for,
but it does hold a position in the world of academia. Garrett (2009) notes that individuals engage
in selective challenge avoidance, but that the effect is much weaker than selective exposure (p.
679). Further, the process of selective avoidance is when an individual insulates himself or
herself from attitudinally dissimilar others. It is often characterized by a certain level of political
preference which becomes more prominent within such a politically competitive and conflicting
environment. In these instances, selective avoidance is likely to occur (Zhu, Skoric, & Shen,
2017, p. 114).
Although mentioned that selective avoidance tends to be in the shadows of selective
exposure, scholars like Garrett (2009) demonstrate that this concept is different from the
common practice of selective exposure, meaning that this concept does not necessarily sacrifice
exposure to counter-attitudinal information (p. 680). Other scholars like Song (2017) would
argue that the main distinction between selective approach and selective avoidance would
differentiate between psychological motivations like emotions.
But how does this relate to the topic of Trump and news media? In terms of online media,
according to Zhu and colleagues (2017), during times of political turmoil, political disagreement
often becomes emotionally charged and visible, reflecting the contention between different sides
of a debate in the real world (p. 113). And just like selective exposure, it is easier to deflect any
16
opinion-challenging information. Interestingly, the author also states that political intolerance is
also a product of the changing conditions of factual and perceived societal threats. People, when
watching the news, don’t want to feel threatened in any way possible. This is when the role and
the importance of the media come in, therefore, the process of media selection will be briefly
discussed.
Partisan Media Selection
It is undeniable how much the media environment has grown, and with growth comes
endless choices of content. With the expansion of content generation by cable news and internet
sites, it has become crucial for news organizations to create niche audiences by catering to the
audience’s predispositions (Mullainathan & Schleifer, 2005). As Nelson and Webster (2017)
argue, the abundance of ideologically tinged media outlets available in a digital media
environment has led many academics and social commentators to expect partisan selective
exposure to rule the day (p. 2). In other words, it is expected for conservatives and liberals to
seek out media outlets that align with their partisan predispositions.
In the cable industry, FOX News, CNN, and MSNBC describe themselves as news
outlets reporting with a sense of equilibrium and fairness in their views, representing both sides
of the political spectrum when covering any given story (Gil de Zúñiga, Correa, Valenzuela,
2012, p. 600). However, other studies suggest that such claims are not entirely true and not so
balanced, particularly FOX News. In a study by Groeling and Baum (2007), when comparing
Associated Press, FOX News, and UPI, they found that FOX News leaned significantly toward
conservative and Republican in comparison to the other two news organizations. Further,
Groseclose and Miyo (2005) found that CNN’s News Night leaned toward the left compared to
17
FOX News’ Special Report (as cited in Gil de Zúñiga, 2012, p. 600). Based on the above
discussion and the previous literature on Mexican Immigration, the following hypotheses are
aimed to be tested:
H1a: Selective avoidance of conservative news media will be positively associated with
attitudes towards Mexican immigrants.
H1b: Selective avoidance of conservative news media will be positively associated with
attitudes towards immigration.
H2a: Perceived accuracy of conservative media will be negatively associated with attitudes
toward Mexican immigrants.
H2b: Perceived accuracy of conservative media will be negatively associated with attitudes
toward immigration.
H3a: Selective exposure has a significant relationship to anti-immigrant sentiment.
H3b: Selective exposure has a significant relationship to perceptions of Mexican immigrants.
Moreover, the attributes of an issue emphasized in the news coverage can, for example,
directly influence the direction of public opinion (McCombs & Shaw, 1993). In his study,
Thompson (2020) finds that effect by Trump is shaped by the polarization of media audiences
and selective exposure to conservative media (p. 120), therefore, what happens when selective
avoidance replaces the latter? Interestingly, another important find is that Whites’ attitudes
towards the media are being shaped by Trump himself. In addition, his results showed that the
effect for Trump is strongest among Republican-leaning partisans who get their political and
election news from Republican and conservative-leaning outlets. Therefore, in order to
understand the role media and Trump plays in the public’s perception towards Mexican
immigrants and sentiments on immigration, the following hypotheses will be used in this
research:
H4: Perceived accuracy of Trump’s rhetoric about Mexican immigrants will be negatively
associated with attitudes toward Mexican immigration.
H5: Pre-existing anti-immigration attitudes will positively predict hostile perceptions toward
immigrants from Mexico.
18
CHAPTER IV: METHODOLOGY
Design
A mixed method approach was used in this study in hopes of understanding how
participants engage with media selection and how they may interpret Trump’s 2016 rhetoric.
Participants of the study were given a quantitative-based survey which took approximately 20-25
minutes to complete. To sample the participants, a 21-question survey was given through the
web-based survey tool, Qualtrics (see Appendix A). Seventeen of those questions were in
multiple-choice format; two were open-ended but one (Q8) was further analyzed by a being
coded; the rest were scaled-based questions. The majority of the answers were collected using a
five or ten-point Likert scale. Further, the questions attempt to measure different sections of
political standings, such as media exposure (social media, news media, traditional media), (anti)
immigration sentiment, immigration beliefs, and perceptions on Mexican immigration, selective
exposure, and selective avoidance. Other sections include questions regarding demographics and
political affiliations.
Procedure
Upon opening the Qualtrics link and reading the consent form, participants were asked to
select “I do not consent” or “I consent.” If respondents chose to give consent, the next page
proceeded to introduce the first question of the survey; for those that did not consent, they were
taken to the end page. This study aimed to understand if residents of Hawai‘i engaged in
selective avoidance of conservative news media in addition to gaining insight into the political
standing regarding the topic of Mexican Immigration in the United States. The survey was made
live in February 2021 and closed in March 2021, lasting approximately one month. As briefly
stated, the goal of this survey was to obtain data on Hawaii’s (primarily O’ahu) public’s
19
sentiment and perceptions about Mexican immigrants due to Trump’s shared opinions on this
particular group of immigrants.
Study Sample
For the study, participants were recruited via the author’s personal Facebook account,
personal affiliations, through participants that chose to share the survey, and word of mouth.
From 61 survey participants, a total of 35 responses met the criteria and were used for further
analysis. The total number indicates that the respondents met the following requirement: (1)
eighteen and older, (2) must reside in Hawai‘i, and (3) fully completed the survey.
Measures
The following table (Table 1) gives an overview of the important indexes that were measured
throughout this analysis process. They are further discussed in detail in their respective section,
20
but the main variables analyzed were selective avoidance, anti-immigration sentiment, and
perceptions of Mexican immigrants.
Independent Variables
A set of independent variables will be examined to understand anti-immigration
sentiment and perceptions of Mexican immigrants. These variables casually link and play a vital
role in understanding the relationship between the dependent and independent variables. The
next section will discuss these independent measures.
News Exposure
News exposure to conservative news was measured by asking participants a set of
questions regarding how often they had watched conservative news that week, upon taking the
survey, and how accurately they think such news outlets are. Questions one and two were broken
down into four categories of conservative news sources. When asked “In the past week, how
much attention have you paid to news from conservative news outlets,” Fox News appeared to be
the most watched (M=1.54, SD=0.817), followed by The Daily Caller (M=1.26, SD=0.611), The
New York Post (M=1.03, SD=0.169), and Breitbart News (M=1.06, SD=0.236), all while using a
5-point Likert scale from “1--Not at all” to “5--All the time.” Using the same four categories and
a 10-point Likert scale “1--Inaccurate to “10--Accurate,” participants were then asked to rate the
level of accuracy of each media outlet; in terms of descriptive information for each news outlet,
the statistics (M=3.15, SD=1.67) showed to have strong reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.879).
21
Selective Avoidance and Exposure
A two-item scale for the selective avoidance was used, measuring how often participants
avoid news outlets that may not align with their political predispositions; such questions were
modified from Tsfati’s (2016) Confirmatory Factor Analysis Two-Factor Model to fit this study.
The following question and statement were given to the respondents measured by a 5-point
Likert scale, “1--Not at all” to “5--All the time;” (1) “How often do you ‘block’ news from
conservative news outlets on your social media feed?” (Cronbach’s α = 0.479, M=2.6, SD=1.27);
(2) “I try to avoid exposure to media outlets expressing irritating opinions.” (Cronbach’s α =
0.419, M=3.34, SD=1.19). Using the same scale for selective exposure; participants were given
the following statement: “I try to expose myself only to media outlets and news messages that
are in line with my own attitudes” (M=2.86, SD=1.24, max=5) concluding that the majority of
the participants moderately participated in pro-attitudinal exposure of news.
Further, to measure the preferred method of media consumption was measured with a
three-item scale. Participants were asked “How often do you get news from…?” (a) social media
site (Twitter, Facebook, etc.), (b) from a news website or app, (c) traditional media (television,
newspaper, radio, etc.). Using a 4-point Likert scale, 1= Often, 2=Sometimes, 3=Hardly ever,
4=Never, a media index was created (M=1.89, SD=0.420). Descriptively, social media is the
most popular source of news media consumption (M=1.54, SD=0.817), followed by the use of
news websites or apps (M=1.83, SD=0.747), and last is traditional media (M=2.29, SD=0.987).
The other variables included in the survey are composed of questions regarding the topics
of immigration beliefs and Trump’s rhetoric.
22
Immigration beliefs and Trump’s Rhetoric
Question eight was an open-ended question that asked respondents to briefly answer what
they believed to be Trump’s views on Mexican immigrants, which was then qualitatively coded;
the process of the codebook creation is further discussed in the last section. Out of the thirty-five
respondents, thirty-three answered this question. Further, responses were categorized into four
themes: racism, criminality, law-abiding, and economic concern (see Appendix B).
Using a 5-point Likert scale, once more, question nine followed by asking respondents if
they agreed with such views, “1--Strongly Disagree” to “5--Strongly Agree.” For this question,
the results showed that the respondents for the most part disagreed with what they assumed to be
Trump’s views on Mexican immigrants (M=1.54, SD=0.919, max=4).
By asking the following questions, we hoped to have some form of understanding about
the influence and thinking of the issue on Mexican immigrants from the respondents, therefore,
helping us decipher what may play a role in thought influence or whether a different factor
played a greater role in changes of sentiment and perception.
Dependent Variables
The dependent variables aimed to measure the participant's (Hawai‘i residents)
perceptions and sentiments on the topic of Mexican immigration.
Anti-immigration Sentiment
Anti-immigration sentiment was measured through a set of three questions. For this
question, a 10-point Likert scale was used (1= strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree); however,
23
the answered were reverse coded, meaning the higher the score, the stronger the anti-
immigration sentiment. These questions aimed to evaluate whether participants had positive or
negative sentiments about immigration in the U.S and each question was based on different
dimensions of the U.S. immigration discussion. Question eleven touched on the subject of the
economy; question twelve asked about the cultural aspect; thirteen asked about livelihood, more
specifically if immigration made the U.S. a worse or better place to live. The index for this
variable showed that participants felt more positively towards immigration policy and immigrant
presence in the U.S. (Cronbach’s α = 0.757, M=2.51, SD=1.54).
Perceptions
Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants were measured by a total of seven statements that
participants rated from “1= disagree strongly” to “5 = agree strongly” on a 5-point Likert scale.
Statements 2, 4, and 6 had to be reverse coded so that high-scores transformed into low-scores on
the scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.714, M=1.78, SD=0.650); this means that people that score lower on
the scale are in favor or feel more positively towards Mexican immigrants. Important to notify
that this question was modified to be specific about Mexican immigration in reference to the
Illegal Immigration Opinion Survey (Lyons, Kenworthy, & Popan. 2010).
Control Variables
The control variables for this survey were age, gender, ethnicity, political interest, and
political party affiliation. Others include income and education level. The following
demographics describe the participants that took place in this study. In terms of gender, females
made up the majority of the responses (N=22, 62.9%); men (N=13, 37.1%). Other demographic
24
characteristics were: age (M=27.5 years old), ethnicity (42.9% Asian, 25.7% Native Hawaiian or
Pacific Islander, 20.0% Hispanic or Latinx, 5.7% White, and 5.7% Other), education level (at
least 85.7% had attended some college or higher), median household income ($25,000-$49,999
per year), and political affiliations (51.5% Democrat, 33.3% Independent, 6.1% Republican).
Data Analysis
After the month-long period of data collection, descriptives and correlations were run
through Jamovi to test the hypotheses and research questions for the quantitative portions of the
study.
Thematic Coding Analysis
Since it was aimed to understand how those exposed to Trump’s rhetoric perceived his
speech, participants were asked to describe Trump’s beliefs on Mexican immigrants. Coding was
approached inductively. After completion of the codebook (see Appendix B), two additional
researchers offered suggestions on the following themes: racism (which was further broken
down into as the sub-theme, xenophobia, criminality, law-abiding, and economic concern.
25
CHAPTER V: RESULTS
This section will discuss the findings from the research analysis as it examines the
hypotheses proposed in this study in sections. The following table shows the results for all the
sections covered below.
Selective Avoidance, Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants, and Anti-immigration Sentiment
The first hypothesis (H1a) proposes that respondents who don’t engage in conservative
news media are more likely to have positive perceptions towards Mexican immigrants. Results
from the Pearson correlation, as seen in Table 2, show that selective avoidance and perception of
Mexican immigrants had a negative correlation (r(35)= -0.091) as expected, however, it was not
significant. This results in H1a are not being supported. Hypothesis 1b stated that respondents
that practiced selective avoidance of conservative news media would be positively associated
with attitudes toward immigration. This hypothesis was supported. The correlation was negative
and reached significance (r(35)= -0.385, p<0.05). Therefore, people who choose to avoid
26
conservative news media, have lower levels of anti-immigration sentiment or, said differently,
more positive attitudes toward immigration.
Conservative News Accuracy, Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants, and Anti-immigration
Sentiment
Because participants in this study were not as familiar with the other options of
conservative news outlets or some decided not to rate them, the study would solely focus on Fox
News as a single variable to measure conservative news accuracy. Under the second research
question, H2a postulated that perceived accuracy of conservative media will be negatively
associated with attitudes toward Mexican immigrants. As seen in Table 2, the correlation
between Fox News accuracy and perception was not significant (r(35)=0.162). As for
conservative news accuracy and anti-immigration sentiment (H2b), it was hypothesized that
perceived accuracy of conservative media would result in negative sentiment towards
immigration; the results were also not significant (r(35)=0.038, p > 0.05). The perceived
accuracy of conservative news media had no significant relationship between perceptions of
Mexican immigrants or anti-immigration sentiment.
Selective Exposure, Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants, and Anti-immigration Sentiment
The variable used to measure selective exposure reads the following: I try to expose
myself only to media outlets and news messages that are in line with my own attitudes.
Examining if selective exposure to news media would have an impact on perceptions of Mexican
immigrants and sentiment towards immigration, results showed an inverse correlation between
selective exposure and anti-immigrant sentiment (r(35)= -0.468, p<0.01). As respondents
consumed media in line with their own views, they were more likely to hold positive sentiments
27
toward immigration. However, there is no relationship between selective exposure and
perceptions toward Mexican immigrants (r(35)=0.068). As a result, there is some significant
relationship between selective exposure and immigration issues.
Trump’s Rhetoric and Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants
Next, looking to find a possible relationship between Trump’s rhetoric and perceptions to
Mexican immigrants, H4 proposed that perceived accuracy of Trump’s rhetoric, would result in
negative perceptions towards this group of immigrants. There is a significant positive correlation
between the two variables (r(35)=0.622, p<0.001), indicating that this hypothesis is supported
(see Table 2). Therefore, respondents who believed Trump’s rhetoric to be correct were more
likely to see Mexican immigrants in a negative light.
Anti-immigration Sentiment and Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants
The last research question inquired about the relationship between anti-immigration
sentiment and perceptions of Mexican immigrants. The following hypothesis (H5) presupposed
that pre-existing anti-immigration attitudes would predict hostile perceptions toward immigrants
from Mexico. Further, this hypothesis was proven to be true (r(35)=0.500, p<0.001). The results
show that there is a significant positive correlation between the two variables. Therefore, the
more one views immigration as a problem for the United States, the more likely they will also
see Mexican immigrants as a burden on society.
28
Demographic Correlations
By running the control variables alongside the selective avoidance, anti-immigration
sentiment, and perception indexes, the following correlations showed to be significant. The first
finding shows a positive correlation between selective avoidance and gender (r(35)=0.339,
p<0.05). This indicates that females were more likely to engage in selective avoidance of
conservative news media; Female (M=3.07, SD=1.05, Max=5), Male (M=2.35, SD=0.899,
Max=3.5). Further, between political interest (M=2.86, SD=0.879) and education (M=4.23,
SD=1.29) there showed to be a significant correlation (r(35)=0.394, p<0.05); this indicates that
the higher the education level, the higher the interest in what is going on in politics. Interested in
the relationship between political interest and perceptions, there was no significant correlation
(r(35)=0.158). Lastly, there was an interesting significant correlations between ethnicity and
Trump’s rhetoric (r(35)= -0.380, p<0.05).
Interpretations of Trump’s Rhetoric
As briefly discussed in the methods section, as part of the Trump rhetoric variable, the
survey contained an open-ended question where participants were asked to describe what
Trump’s beliefs towards Mexican immigrants were. This question was qualitatively coded and
among those answers, there were four identifiable themes; many of those answers also simply
shared their personal opinions towards Trump. Nonetheless, the open-ended responses suggested
specific themes towards Trump or his beliefs towards Mexican immigration. For each theme, one
statement will be displayed in this section, however, for additional statements see Appendix B.
29
Racism
The first notable theme was racism; some respondents attributed Trump’s belief toward Mexican
immigrants as racism.
Racist and stereotypical thoughts about Mexicans and their linkages to crime.
This category of racism was further broken down into the sub-category, xenophobia where the
respondents shared the following:
“[Trump] dehumanizes mexicans and talks about them like they are lesser than
him. He believes they have bad work-ethic…”
Criminality
The second apparent theme was the mention of criminality. There was evidence among
respondents that Trump believes that Mexican immigrants engage in criminal behavior.
Trump believes that Mexicans are rapists, murderers, kidnappers, and junkies.
Law-abiding was the next theme, some of the respondents shared the following;
No problem with legal immigration. [Trump] has a large problem with illegal
immigration from any country, as the name implies it is illegal.
Economic concerns
The last apparent theme from this question mentions that Trump’s beliefs have to do with how
immigration impacts the U.S. economy.
“[Trump] believes they don’t add anything to our country, that they are all illegal
immigrants and should go back “home”…they post a risk to America and shouldn’t
receive all the benefits that Americans have…he believes they are less than humans
because he is willing to build a wall or displace them from their families.”
30
CHAPTER VI: DISCUSSION
The current study was an attempt to understand the relationship between selective
avoidance and exposure, news accuracy, anti-immigration sentiment, and Mexican immigrant
perceptions while considering Trump’s anti-Mexican rhetoric as a key factor. Previous research
has studied similar topics of bipartisan media selection; however, no research has been done to
specifically focus on the region of Hawai‘i, a place far away from the border and where the
Mexican and Hispanic population exists but is not a majority.
Selective exposure and selective avoidance have long been described as premises from
the cognitive dissonance theory. Ultimately, with the extensive research done on the topic, it has
been concluded that individuals are motivated to reduce dissonance and one way to do this is to
seek out opinion-reinforcing information although avoiding opinion-challenging information
(Garrett, 2009). As stated, one of the purposes of this study was to look into the correlation of
selective avoidance and selective exposure to news media and the effect on immigration.
Selective Avoidance and Selective Exposure
First, the study attempted to analyze the following question, how does selective
avoidance of conservative news media influence anti-immigration sentiment and perception
towards Mexican immigrants? For this study due to participants in this study not being too
familiar with the other options of conservative news outlets (The New York Post, The Daily
Caller, and Breitbart News), rating them the lowest or simply leaving the question blank, Fox
News was the representative of this category. Moreover, there was no correlation between
selective avoidance and perceptions of Mexican immigrants, but there was a significant
relationship between selective avoidance and anti-immigration sentiment. Therefore, respondents
31
who engaged less with conservative news media were more likely to hold favorable stances on
immigration.
The second set of hypotheses postulated that respondents (H2A) who perceived
conservative news media (Fox News) to be accurate would be more likely to have negative
perceptions towards Mexican immigrants and (H2B) that the more accuracy conservative news
media was granted, the higher the negative sentiment towards immigration; however, the results
were not significant indicating that these statements were not supported. Collectively, this set of
participants rated Fox News low on accuracy (M=3.29, SD=2.09); however, going through the
results, it was interesting to see 31.4% of participants rated Fox News 5 or higher in accuracy,
max being an 8, considering the fact that this group was more Democratic-leaning.
Selective exposure, as described by many scholars, is the decision to engage with
predisposition matching information in an attempt to avoid cross-cutting information, therefore
further strengthening favorable views (Thompson, 2020; Berelson & Steiner, 1964). Garrett
(2009) suggests that selective exposure and avoidance do not particularly exhibit a systematic
bias against opinion-challenging information (p. 679). Further, it was found that selective
exposure had a significant inverse relationship with anti-immigrant sentiment. Given the
democratic lean among many respondents, it is plausible that they selectively chose liberal media
outlets that supported their views toward immigration policy. In similar studies, scholars have
found that Republicans tend to encounter more information favoring their political views,
engaging in less cross-cutting discussion while Democrats and liberals encountered a balanced
mix of political information (Sears & Freedman, 1967; Garrett, 2009). But because the sample in
this study lacked strong Republicans or conservatives (the 6.1% of Republicans in this study
32
identified a moderate), it would be difficult to note whether this finding supports previous
literature.
By avoiding conservative media and taking into account the level of accuracy given to
Fox News, we would like to believe that citizens demonstrate awareness of an increasingly
saturated and complex media environment that acknowledges the partisan bias of select outlets;
however, there is little empirical research that systematically investigates how cross-cutting news
selection can be encouraged with journalistic tools or online interventions (van der Meer et al.,
2020).
Furthermore, Bennett and Iyengar (2008) have stated that increasing levels of selective
exposure based on partisan preference has minimal consequences, at least insofar as
persuasive effects are concerned (p. 725). Although, it has been suggested that selective
consumption of media leads to attitude strengthening and reinforcement, which are strong media
effects (Holbert et al., 2010).
Trump’s Rhetoric and Immigration
In an attempt to understand the relationship between media effects and news media
selection, we asked respondents to recollect Trump’s previous ideologies towards Mexican
immigrants. When asked if they found his rhetoric to be accurate, it was hypothesized that
perceived accuracy of Trump’s rhetoric about Mexican immigrants would be negatively
associated with attitudes toward Mexican immigration, assuming that his rhetoric was influential;
the findings were supported.
33
Previous research has looked into understanding what factors play an important role in
attitude changes. Attributes of an issue emphasized in the news coverage can, for example,
directly influence the direction of public opinion (McCombs & Shaw, 1993). What is interesting
about this finding is that, although participants highly engage in selective avoidance of
conservative news, it can be hypothesized that more liberal outlets also contribute to the
misrepresentation of minority groups, like in this case, Mexican immigrants. As Gil de Zúñiga et
al. (2012) state, people’s views toward immigrants and immigration are fed and shaped by
the media (p. 602) and that filtering mass media, selecting certain issues, and portraying them
frequently and prominently, leads people to perceive those issues as more important than others
(Yang et al., 2016, p. 4). Further, it gives us a sense of the amount of coverage Trump’s rhetoric
and beliefs filled news outlets during his term. Acknowledging understanding of how the media
works, “there is a certain sense that the media played an important role in this extraordinary turn
of events. This applies both to the news and social media individually, and even more so to the
combination of them” (Boczkowski & Papacharissi, 2018).
Relating Anti-Immigration Sentiment and Perceptions of Mexican Immigrants
In further understanding media effects, sentiment and perceptions were other
variables studied, more specifically anti-immigration sentiment and perceptions. Because it
has been established that the news tells us what to think about and tells us how to think about it
(McCombs and Shaw, 1993), it was assumed that (H5) pre-existing anti-immigration attitudes
would positively predict hostile perceptions toward Mexican immigrants. Referencing back to
Bikmen’s (2015) finding that individuals who may feel strongly or somewhat opposed to
immigration, may already have set perceptions. If factors like news stories or media coverage
34
play an important role then depending on the frames used it is likely to activate and reinforce
negative racial stereotypes which may influence perceptions about immigrants and immigration
(Dunaway, Branton & Abrajano, 2010). With that said, H5 was supported; the higher the anti-
immigration sentiment, the higher the negative perceptions towards Mexican immigrants.
Ultimately, this finding relates to the Trump rhetoric and perceptions question in that highly
publicized information is not only effective by the number of times seen but by the way the topic
is portrayed.
In addition, another interesting find from the study was seeing that there was a
correlation between selective avoidance and selective exposure with anti-immigration sentiment,
but not perceptions of Mexican immigration. Because Hawai‘i is far away from the mainland and
has had a rich history with immigration, it is not too surprising that this correlation would be
positive, meaning that participants scored low on anti-immigration sentiment. According to
Bikmen (2015), recent studies have shown that exposure to narratives about group history can
influence attitudes towards immigration (p.4). For example, perceiving characteristics of
particular groups like values, norms, or traits, can create a sense of social identity. Again, given
the long history of immigration that exists in Hawai‘i, it can be expected that this group would be
in favor or at least more open to immigration. Without excluding the “Aloha spirit,” of course!
Negative images of Mexican immigration, in particular, have pervaded the news media
in general, including FOX News and CNN (Cisneros, 2008), which could be a contributing
factor to the insignificant correlation between selective avoidance and selective exposure
with perceptions of Mexican immigration. Moreover, according to the theory of color line, all
immigrant groups may be targets of prejudicial attitudes of the host society, both now and in the
35
past but, in addition, a color line in attitudes toward immigrants exists (Deaux, 2004). One study
found that U.S. residents favored Poles and Chinese, Jamaicans were somewhat unfavorable,
while Mexicans were found to be the least favorable (Mizrahi, 2005). In a different study, it was
found that in low-immigration states, such as Ohio, evaluations of Asian and European
immigrants did not differ; however, Latin American immigrants were rated significantly lower
(Timberlake & Williams, 2012). Further, participants who thought that unauthorized
immigration was a big problem rated Latin American immigrants, but not European or Asian
immigrants more negatively (Bikmen, 2015, p. 5). In the case of our diversity among Hawai‘i
residents and the perceptions of Mexican immigrants, the following statistics were found: White
(N= 2, M=2.86, SD=0.404); Asian (N=14, M=1.89, SD= 0.619); Hispanic (N=7, M=1.67,
SD=0.746); Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (N=9, M=1.29, SD=0.501); Other (N=2,
M=1.57, SD=0.202). Now, this study cannot determine the relationship among different minority
groups, but it goes to show that there is some form of negative perception against Mexican and
other Hispanic groups on a global scale.
Other studies focusing on control variables have found that several factors correlate with
people’s views on immigration. Individuals with lower education, those who are older, and
females tend to have more negative attitudes toward tolerant immigration policies (Espenshade &
Calhoun, 1993; Simon, 1987). Contrary to the statement above, females in this study
gravitated towards having more positive attitudes towards Mexican immigrants; the level of
education of our respondents was high; at least 85.7% of the group has an Associate’s or
higher.
36
All in all, it can be concluded that residents of Hawai‘i do care about immigration, and
media selection is playing a significant factor towards views on immigration policy and culture.
However, Hawai‘i respondent’s media choices were not correlated with perceptions of Mexican
immigration. On the other hand, Trump’s rhetoric had no impact on immigration sentiment but
had a significant correlation with perceptions of Mexican immigration. Indeed, the largest and
most significant correlation was between Trump’s rhetoric and perception of Mexican
immigration. Therefore, it is plausible to suggest that Trump’s influence over all media
(conservative or liberal) is the most important factor for how Mexican immigration is viewed by
U.S. citizens even in a place as remote as Hawai‘i.
37
CHAPTER VII: CONCLUSION
The past four years in the political climate of the United States was an interesting one, to
say the least. Therefore, this thesis aimed to identify possible relationships between the selective
exposure theory to conservative news media, anti-immigration sentiment, and perceptions of
Mexican immigrants, but more importantly how selective avoidance and exposure relate to this
issue as well. We briefly reflect on the infamous Trump rhetoric directed toward this particular
ethnic group and aim to understand if such words have an effect on the way people feel about
this particular demographic. Further, because the state of Hawai‘i is an inviting environment and
rich in culture, and no similar research study has been done, this idea was pursued.
This research was done primarily through the use of a mixed-method approach. From the
respective hypotheses that were tested and not all were supported, three of six were supported.
Those supported hypotheses found that participating in selective avoidance of conservative news
media affects immigration sentiment, in this case positively, and can possibly contribute toward
lower anti-immigration perception towards Mexican immigrants. Because a majority of the
respondents found Fox News to not be as accurate, there was no significant correlation between
perceptions of Mexican immigrants and conservative news accuracy.
Due to the fact that this study primarily dealt with a high number of participants that
identified as Democrat or Independent, many felt positively towards U.S. immigration policy and
Mexican immigrants. Respondents, for the most part, did not believe Trump’s rhetoric to be true.
For instance, 82.9% of respondents disagreed with his beliefs about Mexican immigration,
showcasing pro-attitudinal perceptions. The last hypothesis suggested that respondents with
higher anti-immigration sentiment would more likely have negative perceptions toward Mexican
38
immigrants which was also supported by the findings. Overall, there is undoubtedly further
research that can be done for this thesis.
Limitations
The most significant and apparent
limitation of this study is the sample size.
From sixty-one responses that were
collected throughout the data collection
period, only thirty-five were usable.
Because of the political standing the
country was in at the time, it is
understandable if the survey may have
conveyed an uncomfortable feeling. I say
this because when the process of cleaning
the data, many of the respondents did not
make it past the first three to four
questions; others stopped at question eight
which gets into the topic of Trump and
Mexican immigration. Another related limitation to this study was recruiting participants that
identified as conservative and or strong Republicans. Upon distributing the survey, a few
conservative groups on Facebook were contacted but only one cooperated in posting the survey
to their page. One respondent from this conservative Facebook page publicly objected to the
survey under the comments of the post, possibly limiting and preventing the number of
Republican participants (See Facebook group post).
39
One more limitation would be the location. It had been previously proposed that this
study would take place not only in Hawai‘i but in U.S. territories as well. Due to the time limit
and the extra IRB requirements, the survey only took place on O’ahu. However, because O’ahu
is very diverse, it would be interesting to see how residents of neighboring islands respond due to
the smaller sizes of ethnic backgrounds.
Future Research
If this research moved forward, a larger sample size would be crucial. More participants
would allow for regression models to be run, resulting in more solidified results on the topic.
Recruitment of participants would not only take place in Hawai‘i but it would be pushed to take
place in U.S. territories that are just or less impacted by Mexican immigration. Further, even
though conservatives and Republicans are a minority in Hawai‘i, it has been apparent that they
have a voice; therefore, having a larger sample of this group would allow us to further
understand their ideologies and stance on the topics discussed in this analysis.
In addition, the approach to recruiting more participants would slightly change in that
more exposure to the survey would be pushed. What is meant by that is that other forms of
contact for participants would be used like using different platforms of social media. On Twitter,
the link would be shared or commented under political representatives, both Democratic and
Republican, in the state of Hawai‘i. Further, recruitment through the university would be another
possible option. Some of the programs that would be targeted include Communication, Political
Science, and Hawaiian Studies. With an approval by the professor(s), extra credit could be
offered and an incentive. Each student willing to participate would earn an extra credit point for
40
taking the survey and up to an additional two points if they recruit local or Hawaiian family and
friends who participate in the study.
An additional research question that was proposed but later dropped could be further
pursued in future work. Again, because of the lack of conservative or Republican participants,
“How do conservative news media, Trump’s rhetoric, and anti-immigration sentiment contribute
toward perceptions of Mexican immigrants?” was not addressed in this study. Lastly, further
research would look at the relationships between different ethnicities and anti-immigration
sentiment and perceptions to see if there is significance in the way different groups feel towards
Mexican immigrants and immigration.
41
References
Appel, J. C. (1954). American labor and the annexation of Hawai‘i: A study in logic and
economic interest. The Pacific Historical Review, 23(1), 1-18.
Bennett, W., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of
political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731.
doi:10.1111/j.1460- 2466.2008.00410.x
Berelson, B., & Steiner, G. A. (1964). Human behavior. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.
Bernat, F. (2019, August 28). Immigration and Crime. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of
Criminology. Retrieved 28 Feb. 2020, from
https://oxfordre.com/criminology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acref
ore-9780190264079-e-93.
Bernstein, A. (2004). "Hiram Fong, 97; Senator From Hawaii‘ for 18 Years". Los Angeles
Times. ISSN 0458-3035.
Bikmen, N. (2015). Still a nation of immigrants? Effects of constructions of national history on
attitudes toward immigrants. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 15(1), 282-302.
Boczkowski, P. J., & Papacharissi, Z. (Eds.). (2018). Trump and the media. MIT Press.
Bump, P. (2015, July 6). Donald Trump’s lengthy and curious defense of his immigrant
comments, annotated. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com
Butz, A. M., & Kehrberg, J. E. (2019). Anti‐immigrant sentiment and the adoption of state
immigration policy. Policy Studies Journal, 47(3), 605-623.
Chaffee, S. H., Saphir, M. N., Grap, J., Sandvig, C., & Hahn, K. S. (2001). Attention to counter-
attitudinal messages in a state election campaign. Political Communication, 18, 247–272.
Cisneros, J. A. (2008). Contaminated communities: The metaphor of ‘‘immigrant as pollutant’’
in media representations of immigration. Rhethoric & Public Affairs, 11(4), 569–601.
Correa, T. (2010). Framing Latinas: Hispanic women through the lenses of Spanish-language
and English-language news media. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 11(4), 425–
443.
Deaux, K. (2004). Immigration and the color line. In G. Philogene (Ed.), Racial identity in
context: The legacy of Kenneth B. Clark (pp. 197–209). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Dick, H. P. (2019). “Build the Wall!”: Post‐Truth on the US–Mexico Border. American
Anthropologist, 121(1), 179-185.
Donohue, John J. 2017. “Comey, Trump, and the Puzzling Pattern of Crime in 2015 and
Beyond.” Columbia Law Review 117 (5): 1297–354.
Dunaway, J., Branton, R. P., & Abrajano, M. A. (2010). Agenda setting, public opinion, and the
issue of immigration reform. Social Science Quarterly, 91(2), 359-378.
Durand, J., Massey, D. S., & Parrado, E. A. (1999). The new era of Mexican migration to the
United States. The Journal of American History, 86(2), 518-536.
Durand, J., Massey, D. S., & Zenteno, R. M. (2001). Mexican immigration to the United
States: Continuities and changes. Latin American research review, 36(1), 107.
Entman, R. (1989). How the Media Affect What People Think: An Information Processing
Approach. The Journal of Politics, 51(2), 347-370.
Espenshade, T. J., & Calhoun, C. A. (1993). An analysis of public opinion toward undocumented
immigration. Population Research and Policy Review, 13, 189–224.
Facchini, G., Mayda, A., & Puglisi, R. (2017). Illegal immigration and media exposure:
42
Evidence on individual attitudes. IZA Journal of Development and Migration, 7(1), 1-36.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2015c). Persons arrested. Washington, DC: 2014 Crime in the
United States.
Fico, F., Richardson, J. D., & Edwards, S. M. (2004). Influence of story structure on perceived
story bias and news organization credibility. Mass communication & society, 7(3), 301-
318.
Flores, R. (2018). Can Elites Shape Public Attitudes Toward Immigrants?: Evidence from the
2016 US Presidential Election. Social Forces, 96(4), 1649-1690.
Fording, R., & Schram, S. (2017). The Cognitive and Emotional Sources of Trump Support:
The Case of Low-Information Voters. New Political Science, 39(4), 670-686.
Frohlich, T. C., Stebbins, S., & Sauter, M. B. (July 15, 2015). America’s most violent (and most
peaceful) states. 24/7 Wall Street.
Fryberg, S. A., Stephens, N. M., Covarrubias, R., Markus, H. R., Carter, E. D., Laiduc, G. A.,
& Salido, A. J. (2012). How the media frames the immigration debate: The critical role of
location and politics. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 12(1), 96-112.
Gantt Shafer, J. (2017). Donald Trump’s “Political Incorrectness”: Neoliberalism as Frontstage
Racism on Social Media. Social Media Society, 3(3), Social Media Society, September
2017, Vol.3(3).
Garrett, R. K. (2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective
exposure debate. Journal of communication, 59(4), 676-699.
GAURAV SINGH, N. I. T. Y. ROLE AND IMPACT OF MEDIA ON SOCIETY: A
SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH WITH RESPECT TO DEMONETISATION.
GAO. (1997). U.S. Insular Areas: Application of the U.S. Constitution. United States General
Accounting Office.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Correa, T., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Selective exposure to cable news and
immigration in the US: The relationship between FOX News, CNN, and attitudes toward
Mexican immigrants. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 597-615.
Gomez Romero, L. (2017). Twitter diplomacy: how Trump is using social media to spur a
crisis with Mexico.
Groeling, T., & Baum, M. A. (2007). Barbarians inside the gate: Partisan news media and the
polarization of American political discourse. Paper presented at the American Political
Science Association, Chicago, IL.
Groseclose, T., & Milyo, J. (2005). A measure of media bias. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 120(4), 1191–1237.
Gutiérrez, R. (2019, July 29). Mexican Immigration to the United States. Oxford Research
Encyclopedia of American History.
Haberman, M., & Burns, A. (2016, March 12). Donald Trump’s Presidential Run Began in an
Effort to Gain Stature. Https://Www.Nytimes.Com/#publisher.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/us/politics/donald-trump-campaign.html
Hanifin, P. W. (1982). Hawaiian Reparations: Nothing Lost, Nothing Owed. Haw. BJ, 17,
107-119.
“Hawai‘i Population 2021.” World Population Review. Retrieved February 2021.
Hernandez, K. (2009). Mexican Immigration to the United States. OAH Magazine of History,
23(4), 25-29.
Holbert, R. L., Garrett, R. K., & Gleason, L. S. (2010). A new era of minimal effects?: A response
to Bennett and Iyengar. Journal of Communication, 60, 15–34.
43
Holley, P. (2016). White Texas Teens Chant “Build That Wall” at Hispanics during High School
Volleyball Match. Washington Post, November 17. https://www.washington
post.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/11/17/white-texas-teens-chant-build-that-wall-at-
hispanics- during-high-school-volleyball-match/?utm_term=.208f111a3f03.
Hong, S., & Nadler, D. (2011, June). Does the early bird move the polls?: The use of the
social media tool 'Twitter' by US politicians and its impact on public opinion. In
Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference:
Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times (pp. 182-186). ACM.
Hurd, J.C. (1968). The Law of Freedom and Bondage in the United States. New York:
Negro Universities Press. pp. 438–439.
Joaquin, T. (2013). “Hawaii’s Mexican community sees 165 percent growth.” Hawai‘i News
Now. Retrieved March 2021.
Justice, B., & Stanley, J. (2016). Teaching in the time of Trump. Social Education, 80(1),
36-41.
Kalb, M. (2018). Enemy of the people: Trump’s war on the press, the New McCarthyism, and
the threat to American Democracy. Brookings Institution Press.
Karpf, D. (2017). Digital politics after Trump. Annals of the International Communication
Association, 41(2), 198-207.
Kaunānā. (2013). “Mexican-origin residents of Hawaiʻi fare better than Mexican counterparts on
mainland, but less well than overall state population. The Research Publication of the
University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa. Retrieved March, 2021.
Kellner, D. (2019). Donald Trump, Media Spectacle, and Authoritarian Populism. Fast
Capitalism, 14(1).
Kim, S. H., Carvalho, J. P., Davis, A. G., & Mullins, A. M. (2011). The view of the border:
News framing of the definition, causes, and solutions to illegal immigration. Mass
Communication and Society, 14(3), 292-314.
King, G., Schneer, B., & White, A. (2017). How the news media activate public expression and
influence national agendas. Science (New York, N.Y.), 358(6364), 776-780.
Kiousis, Spiro. 2001. “Public Trust or Mistrust? Perceptions of Media Credibility in the
Information Age.” Mass Communication and Society 4:381-403.
Klingner, D. (2018). Trump against the world: His policies toward Mexico, and the resistance
from inside and outside the United States.
Krogstad, J.M. (2015). "Hawai‘i is home to the nation's largest share of multiracial
Americans". Factank: News in the Numbers. Retrieved September, 2020.
Lyons, P. A., Kenworthy, J. B., & Popan, J. R. (2010). Ingroup identification and group-level
narcissism as predictors of U.S. citizens’ attitudes and behavior toward Arab
immigrants. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(9), 1267-1280
Massey , Douglas S. 2016. “The Mexico-U.S. Border in the American Imagination.”
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 160 (2): 160–77.
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public
opinion quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1993). The evolution of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five
years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of communication, 43(2), 58-67.
McQuail, D. (1977). The influence and effects of mass media. Mass communication and society,
70-94.
44
Mehrabi, D., Hassan, M. A., & Ali, M. S. S. (2009). News media credibility of the Internet and
television. European Journal of Social Sciences, 11(1), 136-148.
Mendes, A. E. (2016). Digital Demagogue: The Critical Candidacy of Donald J. Trump.
Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, 6.
Mizrahi, K. (2005). Americans’ attitudes toward immigration and immigrants. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation. CUNY Graduate Center.
Morgan, K.L. (2004). Evaluating Guest Worker Programs in the U.S.: A Comparison of the
Bracero Program and President Bush's Proposed Immigration Reform Plan. Berkeley La
Raza Law Journal, 15, 125-161.
Mullainathan, S., & Schleifer, A. (2005). The market for news. American Economic Review, 95,
1031–1053.
Murphy, Heather (September 12, 2019). "El Paso Shooting Suspect Indicted on Capital
Murder Charge". The New York Times. The deadliest attack to target Latinos in modern
American history, the shooting in El Paso, a city that is 80 percent Hispanic, has deeply
disturbed Latinos across the United States.
Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, J. L., & Webster, J. G. (2017). The myth of partisan selective exposure: A portrait of the
online political news audience. Social Media+ Society, 3(3), 2056305117729314.
Ngai, Mae (2004). Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 139.
Osborne, T. J. (1981). Trade or War? America's Annexation of Hawai‘i Reconsidered. The
Pacific Historical Review, 50(3), 285-307.
Patterson, T. E. (2016). News coverage of the 2016 presidential primaries: Horse race
reporting has consequences.
Perea, Juan F. (2003). A brief history of race and the U.S.-Mexican border: Tracing the
trajectories of conquest. UCLA Law Review, 51(1), 283-312.
Pettigrew, T. F. (2017). Social psychological perspectives on Trump supporters. Journal of
Social and Political Psychology, 5, 107–116.
Romero, M. (2018). Trump’s immigration attacks, in brief. Contexts, 17(1), 34-41.
Sanneh, Kelefa. 2015. “A Serious Immigration Debate, Thanks to Donald Trump.” New Yorker,
August 19.
Santamaría Graff, C. C. (2017). 'Build That Wall!': Manufacturing the enemy, yet again.
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 999-1005.
Sears, D. O., & Freedman, J. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 31(2), 194–213.
Seate, A. A., & Mastro, D. (2017). Exposure to immigration in the news: The impact of
group-level emotions on intergroup behavior. Communication Research, 44(6), 817-840.
Sibila, D., Pollock, W., & Menard, S. (2017). Citizenship status and arrest patterns for violent
and narcotic-related offenses in federal districts along the U.S./Mexico Border. American
Journal of Criminal Justice 42(3), 469–488.
Singh, G., & Pandey, N. (2017). Role and Impact of Media on Society: A Sociological Approach
With Respect to Demonetisation. IMPACT: International Journal of Research in
Humanities, Arts and Literature (IMPACT: IJRHAL) ISSN (P): 2347-4564; ISSN (E):
2321, 8878, 127-136.
Soderlund, M. (2007). The role of news media in shaping and transforming the public
45
perception of Mexican immigration and the laws involved. Law & Psychol. Rev., 31, 167.
Song, H. (2017). Why do people (sometimes) become selective about news? The role of
emotions and partisan differences in selective approach and avoidance. Mass Communication
and Society, 20(1), 47-67.
Strömbäck, J., Esser, F., & Lundby, K. (2009). Shaping politics: Mediatization and media
interventionism.
Subervi, F., Torres, J., & Nontalvo, D. (2005). Network Brownout report 2005: The portrayal
of Latinos & Latino issues on network television news, 2004 with a retrospect to 1995.
Austin, TX, & Washington, DC: National Association of Hispanic Journalists.
Retrieved from http://www.nahj.org/2006/10/network-brownout-reports/
Teven, J. J. (2008). An examination of perceived credibility of the 2008 presidential candidates:
Relationships with believability, likeability, and deceptiveness. Human Communication,
11(4), 391-408.
The wall that appals; Donald Trump and Mexico. (2016). The Economist, 421(9015), N/a.
Thompson, J. (2020). White Media Attitudes in the Trump Era. American Politics Research,
49(2), 119-131.
Timberlake, J.M., & Williams, R.H. (2012). Stereotypes of U.S. immigrants from four global
regions. Social Science Quarterly, 93, 867-890
Tsfati, Y. (2016). A New Measure if the Tendency to Select Ideologically Congruent Political
Information: Scale Development and Validation. International Journal of
Communication, 10(2016), 200-225.
U.S.D. .o.f. .S. (2009). Annexation of Hawai‘i, 1898. State.Gov.
https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htm
van der Meer, T. G., & Hameleers, M. (2020). Fighting biased news diets: Using news media
literacy interventions to stimulate online cross-cutting media exposure patterns. New Media
& Society, 1461444820946455.
Verea, M. (2018). Anti-Immigrant and Anti-Mexican Attitudes And Policies during the First 18
Months Of the Trump Administration. Norteamérica, 13(2), 8.
Waldinger, R. (2018). Immigration and the election of Donald Trump: Why the sociology of
migration left us unprepared … and why we should not have been surprised. Ethnic and
Racial Studies, 41(8), 1411-1426.
Wei, K., Booth, J., & Fusco, R. (2019). Cognitive and Emotional Outcomes of Latino Threat
Narratives in News Media: An Exploratory Study. Journal of the Society for Social Work
and Research, 10(2), 213-236.
Wells, C., Shah, D. V., Pevehouse, J. C., Yang, J., Pelled, A., Boehm, F., ... & Schmidt, J. L.
(2016). How Trump drove coverage to the nomination: Hybrid media campaigning.
Political Communication, 33(4), 669-676.
Wilts, A. (2018). Donald Trump Falsely Claims Mexico Is the ‘Number One Most Dangerous
Country in the World,’” Independent, January 18,
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-mexico-
most -dangerous-country-world-twitter-claim-false-global-peace-index-a8166326.html.
Yang, X., Chen, B. C., Maity, M., & Ferrara, E. (2016, November). Social politics: Agenda
setting and political communication on social media. In International Conference on
Social Informatics (pp. 330-344). Springer, Cham.
Zhu, Q., Skoric, M., & Shen, F. (2017). I shield myself from thee: Selective avoidance on social
media during political protests. Political Communication, 34(1), 112-131.
46
Appendix A:
Selective Exposure:
1. In the past week, how much attention have you paid to news from conservative news outlets
such the following? (1--Not at all, 5--All the time)
1. Fox News
b. The New York Post
c. The Daily Caller
d. Breitbart News
❏ 1-Not at all
❏ 2-Slightly
❏ 3-Moderately
❏ 4- Very often
❏ 5-All the time
2. On a scale of 1-10, in your opinion, rate the level of accuracy of this media outlet:
a. Fox News Inaccurate (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) Accurate
b. The New York Post Inaccurate (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) Accurate
c. The Daily Caller Inaccurate (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) Accurate
d. Breitbart News Inaccurate (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) Accurate
Selective Avoidance
3. How often do you ‘block’ news from conservative news outlets on your social media feed?
(1—Not at all, 5—All the time)
❏ 1-Not at all
❏ 2-Slightly
❏ 3-Moderately
❏ 4- Very often
❏ 5-All the time
4. I try to avoid exposure to media outlets expressing irritating opinions. (1—Not at all, 5—All
the time)
❏ 1-Not at all
❏ 2-Slightly
❏ 3-Moderately
❏ 4- Very often
❏ 5-All the time
5. I try to expose myself only to media outlets and news messages that are in line with my own
attitudes. (1—Not at all, 5—All the time)
❏ 1-Not at all
❏ 2-Slightly
❏ 3-Moderately
47
❏ 4- Very often
❏ 5-All the time
Media Use
6a. How often do you get news from a social media site (such as Twitter)?
❏ Often
❏ Sometimes
❏ Hardly ever
❏ Never
6b. How often do you get news from a news website or app?
❏ Often
❏ Sometimes
❏ Hardly ever
❏ Never
6c. How often do you get news from traditional media (television, newspaper, or radio)?
❏ Often
❏ Sometimes
❏ Hardly ever
❏ Never
7. Thinking about news coverage in general, how accurately do you think news
organizations portray Mexican immigrants?
❏ Completely
❏ Very
❏ Moderately
❏ Slightly
❏ Not at all
Trump rhetoric:
8. Open-ended question: In 1-2 sentences, briefly describe Trump’s beliefs about Mexican
immigrants.
9. To what extent do you agree with Trump’s beliefs about Mexican immigrants? (1—Strongly
Disagree to 5—Strongly Agree scale).
❏ 1-Strongly Disagree
❏ 2-Disagree
❏ 3-Neutral
48
❏ 4-Agree
❏ 5-Strongly Agree
10. When you encounter the slogan “Build that Wall” in the media, what group of immigrants
do you believe it mainly pertains to?
❏ Mexican immigrants
❏ The Northern Triangle (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras)
❏ Other
Anti-immigration sentiment
On a scale from 1 - 10, 1 being strongly disagree and 10 being strongly agree. Please answer
the following 3 questions:
11. ‘‘Would you say it is generally bad or good for the US economy that people come live
here from other countries? On this score, 1 means bad for the economy and 10 means
good for the economy.’
❏ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12. ‘Would you say that US cultural life is generally undermined or enriched by people
coming to live here from other countries? On this score, 1 means that cultural life is
undermined, and 10 means that cultural life is enriched.’
❏ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
13. ‘Is the US made a worse or a better place to live by people coming to live here from other
countries? On this score, 1 means it is a worse place to live, and 10 means it is a better place to
live.’
❏ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Perception of Mexican Immigrants
14. Please rate the following:
(In this survey, “Immigrants” will only refer to those of Mexican nationality)
1. Disagree Strongly
2. Disagree Moderately
3. Neither Agree or Disagree
4. Agree Moderately
5. Agree Strongly
1. ____ On average, Mexican immigration has badly affected the U.S. economy.
2. ____ Mexican immigrants do fill jobs that most Americans don’t want.
3. ____ Mexican immigrants have caused increased gang-related deaths in our
country.
4. ____ Mexican immigrants do provide quality, non-skilled labor which benefits the
49
U.S.
5. ____ Children of Mexican immigrants have caused an undue burden on our
federal and state welfare systems.
6. _____We should establish a legal immigrant work program to accommodate
Mexican immigrants.
7. _____U.S. taxpayers should not have to bear the burden of supporting Mexican
immigrants who live here.
Political Interest
15. Some people seem to follow what is going on in government and public affairs most of the
time, whether there is an election or not. Others are not that interested, or are interested in other
things. Would you say you follow what is going on in government?
❏ Hardly at all
❏ Only now and then
❏ Some of the time
❏ Most of the time
Political Party
16. Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a REPUBLICAN, a DEMOCRAT,
an INDEPENDENT, or what?
❏ Republican
❏ Democrat
❏ Independent
❏ Other party
❏ No preference
❏ Don’t know
IF R CONSIDERS SELF A DEMOCRAT/REPUBLICAN
16a.Would you call yourself a STRONG [Democrat/Republican] or a NOT VERY STRONG
[Democrat/Republican]?
❏ Strong
❏ Not very strong
❏ Don’t know
IF R’S PARTY PREFERENCE IS INDEPENDENT, NO PREFERENCE, OTHER, DK
16b. Do you think of yourself as CLOSER to the Republican Party or to
the Democratic Party?
❏ Closer to Republican
❏ Closer to Democratic
❏ Don’t know
Demographics:
50
17. What is your age?
18. Ethnicity
❏ White
❏ Hispanic or Latinx
❏ Black or African American
❏ Asian
❏ Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
❏ Native American or American Indian
❏ Other
19. Gender
❏ Male
❏ Female
❏ Other
20. Education: What is the highest level of school you have completed or the highest degree
you have received?
❏ Less than high school degree
❏ High school degree or equivalent (e.g., GED)
❏ Some college but no degree
❏ Associate degree
❏ Bachelor’s degree
❏ Graduate degree
21. Level of Income: Which of these would you say best describes your income?
❏ $0
❏ $1 to $9 999
❏ $10 000 to $24,999
❏ $25 000 to 49,999
❏ $50 000 to 74,999
❏ $75 000 to 99,999
❏ $100 000 to 149,999
❏ $150,000 and greater
❏ Prefer not to answer
51
Appendix B:
Themes Subthemes Descriptions Example Quotes
Racism
Xenophobia
Participants describe Trump and/or his beliefs on Mexican
Immigrants to be racist.
Participants describe Trump’s beliefs and attitudes as
negative/stereotypical towards immigrants.
He’s a racist pos blaming an outgroup to gain power. Build a wall. Fuck the Mexicans lol Racist and stereotypical thoughts about Mexicans and their linkages to crime Ignorant. As someone who has grown up and been acquainted with Mexican immigrants, they are just like everybody else in this country but different documentation. Trump’s views on immigrants shows how xenophobic he truly is. He dehumanizes mexicans and talks about them like they are lesser than him. He believes they have bad work-ethic (all I can remember I don’t have the energy for him) That Mexicans are a “pest”. He looks at them as second class citizens.
Criminality
Participants describe Trump’s beliefs against Mexican immigrants to be due to
“criminal” behavior.
Trump believes that Mexicans are rapists, murderers, kidnappers, and junkies. Criminals who steal the American people’s jobs and tax the system Rapist, bad people That they are all rapists and murderers and we should fear for our lives and our livlihoods. Utter bullshit.
Law-Abiding
Participants describe or mention support for legal
immigration/Naturalization.
He believes that all immigrants need to follow the US Naturalization process. He upholds the US Immigration Laws and has praised legal immigrants for coming in the legal way. Your statement should state whether the Mexican immigrants are legal or illegal! No problem with legal immigration. He has a large problem with illegal immigration from any country, as the name implies it is illegal.
52
Trump believes that they do not belong in America because of their “illegal ways” of entering.
Economic concerns
Participants mention economic factors as a reason for Trump’s
beliefs against Mexican immigrants.
He believes they’re stealing jobs from Americans He has generalized them to be “bad people” who want to take advantage of the U.S. He believes they don’t add anything to our country, that they are all illegal immigrants and should go back “home”. He believes they post a risk to America and shouldn’t receive all the benefits that Americans have. He believes they are less than humans because he is willing to build a wall or displace them from their families.
53
Appendix C:
54