This presentation focuses on a finding by Regina Branton and Johanna Dunaway that immigration coverage and, more specifically, negative depictions of immigrants by newspapers increase as the Latino population in a district increases up to a certain point (between 18% and 27%) in California. This is due to the issue of immigration being more local due to the geographical proximity to the border and a growing Latino population that residents may fear threaten security and take away economic opportunities from natives. With the 2nd District located in Texas, another border state, this theory would likely be applicable. As the Latino population exceeds this point, however, newspapers decrease both their coverage of immigration and negative aspects of immigration attributed to Latinos because they worry continuing this coverage will alienate a large consumer-base needed to stay in operation. Since the 2nd District’s Latino population is currently 32.1% of the total population and above the 18-27% range, this analysis predicts coverage of immigration and negative depictions of immigrants will be less than in another market with a Latino population within the 18-27% range and a more positive tone will be made towards immigrants. Additionally, this analysis predicts the focus of stories in the 2nd District will be on immigrant experiences and immigrant contributions to the economy and away from the threat narrative of crime and economic pain that would be more readily presented in a market with a Latino population within the 18-27% range.

Newspapers were the chosen sources of media to make the results of this analysis most comparable to Branton and Dunaway’s research (they also used newspapers). The newspapers chosen for this analysis were the Houston Chronicle and the Tyler Morning Telegraph. The Houston Chronicle is the largest newspaper in the 2nd District, and the Tyler Morning Telegraph is the largest newspaper from Tyler, Texas, an area with a Latino population of 19%, which is within the 18-27% range where media companies see painting immigration and negative depictions of immigrants as important to maximizing profits. The two newspapers were chosen to be with the same state for two reasons: the first is that Branton and Dunaway also used data from only one state to test their hypothesis (California), and the second is that restricting newspaper coverage within the same state controls for state laws and state political rhetoric that influences news coverage. Regarding tone, articles showing immigrant experiences, immigrant economic contributions, or negative effects of the shutdown all denote positive experiences. Showing immigrant experiences within a broader society, usually through immigrants sharing their immigration stories or through political activism against restrictionist policies, and the economic benefits of immigration, often through reports saying how cutting immigration levels would hurt the US economy, counteract the Latino threat narrative, which portrays Latino immigrants disproportionately as being criminals and taking economic opportunities from natives. The last criteria, showing the downsides of the shutdown, was included because the premise for the shutdown was for President Trump to receive funding for his wall, and stories that prioritize the negative effects of the shutdown ignore this motive and imply that obtaining funding for the wall is insignificant in comparison. This is positive for immigrants because it implies that Americans are willing to prioritize other services over a policy meant to keep out immigrants. Articles are negative if they highlight problems associated with immigration, like crime/security concerns and immigrants taking economic opportunities from natives or draining social services, as they support the Latino threat narrative. Finally, articles are neutral if they show no preference for positive or negative aspects of immigration, including if an article presents both sides of an issue without making a judgment of which side is better or promoting a compromise bill that includes restrictionist and liberal measures (e.g. DACA protections and a wall). Articles were excluded if they came up within the seven search terms (“immigration,” “immigrant,” “border,” “wall,” “undocumented,” “shutdown,” and “security.”) but were not related to the topic of immigration or the shutdown (e.g. a story mentioning a “wall” painting).

The Houston Chronicle articles have a disproportionate emphasis on immigration in comparison to the Tyler Morning Telegraph. 8.3% of all articles in The Houston Chronicle from December 11, 2018 to January 31, 2019 discuss immigration or shutdown-related material, while 2.9% of all articles in the Tyler Morning Telegraph do the same. 75% of all Houston Chronicle articles included positive material, 18.5% were negative, and 6.5% were neutral.  Meanwhile, 46.8% of all Tyler Morning Telegraph articles were positive, 40.3% were negative, and 13% were neutral. Articles in the Houston Chronicle skews toward positive material, while the Tyler Morning Telegraph has significantly more negative articles and slightly more neutral articles than in the Houston Chronicle.

The Houston Chronicle’s greater emphasis on immigration-related articles than the Tyler Morning Telegraph rejects Branton and Dunaway’s hypothesis that media outlets will decrease their coverage of immigration after the Latino population surpasses an 18-27% range. However, the Houston Chronicle pays less attention to negative coverage of Latino immigration and more attention to stories that focus on immigrant experiences/positive contributions of immigrants (29.4% of immigration articles in the Houston Chronicle have this focus, as opposed to 20.8% of immigration articles in the Tyler Morning Telegraph), which supports Branton and Dunaway’s hypothesis that negative coverage of immigration will decrease as the Latino population passes the 18-27% range. This potentially occurred because of Latino backlash to negative public perceptions of them, which caused media coverage not to decrease, but to include more positive images of immigrants to appease their large Latino consumer base. While the Tyler Morning Telegraph features more coverage of negative stories than the Houston Chronicle, it should be noted that  positive stories still outnumbered negative ones, questioning whether the Latino threat narrative is truly the predominant media narrative, even in areas where Latinos comprise 18-27% of the population. An interesting fact about the amount of positive coverage of Latinos, however, is that 60.2% of all positive articles in the Houston Chronicle and 55.6% of all positive articles in the Tyler Morning Telegraph focused on the negative impact of the shutdown. This shows that even articles which positively frame immigrants focus more on the costs restrictive policies have on natives, as opposed to directly discussing immigrant experiences and contributions. Framing immigration in this manner still leaves consumers of the news in the dark about competing images to the Latino threat narrative, questioning whether increasing positive coverage in high-Latinos areas changes stereotypes or just paints other issues as being more important than immigration.

Demographics have changed a fair amount in Texas’s 2nd District. It is important to note, however, that congressional redistricting occurred in 2012 that eliminated parts of southeast Texas, which included larger African American and white populations, and added neighborhoods in Houston heavily populated by Latinos. These new geographic boundaries may influence the demographic changes noted. From 2007 to 2017, the Latino population increased from 19.7% to 32.1%, meaning that articles discussing how changing Latino demographics impacts local voting patterns will be relevant. The district also has a high and rising foreign-born population (21.7% in 2017, compared with 11.3% in 2007), as well as a high and rising proportion of Latinos who are immigrants (40.5% of all Latinos in 2017, compared with 37.7% in 2007), making articles discussing immigration policy and high volumes of immigrants in an area relevant to this presentation. Moreover, the high proportion of Latinos who are immigrants means this presentation will distinguish between articles discussing attitudes possessed by/toward this group of Latinos in particular. While the Asian population grew (a change from 3.2% in 2007 to 7.7% in 2017), the small overall size of Asians in the district meaning articles discussing the impact of a large Asian population will not hold much significance to this presentation. Finally, the non-Hispanic white population decrease from 55.9% in 2007 to 45.2% in 2017, meaning that articles discussing a declining white population in the context of rising minority populations (in this case, largely Latinos) will be relevant to the following discussion.

The scholarly theories in this presentation were selected based on their relevance to the 2nd District. De Graauw’s article was discussed due to the district containing western parts of Houston, America’s 4th largest city. Due to Houston’s population and its proximity to the southern border, it will likely be a “gateway city” for immigrants, meaning that many immigrant nonprofits will likely headquarters themselves there and advocate for immigrant integration into local politics and society. Branton and Dunaway’s piece was featured due to the rising Latino population in the district and to see how these changing demographics would change media incentives. A rising, but small Latino population would incentivize more coverage of immigration, as the issue would be of interest to the majority white population. However, after a certain threshold (around 18-27% Latino), media organizations view Latinos as potential consumers of media and decrease immigration coverage to not dissuade Latino viewers. Abrajano and Hajnal’s piece was included because of the large Latino population and large, but declining white population in the 2nd District. This theory predicts whites would view the large Latino population as a potential threat to white communities via economic competition, rising crime, competition for social services, and threats to white political power. Finally, Abrajano and Singh’s article was included due to the large number of foreign-born Latinos in the district. This theory predicts that native-born Latinos are more likely to take mainstream policy positions, causing them to view illegal immigration more negatively than immigrant Latinos who may be undocumented themselves or more closely relate to a shared immigrant experience with undocumented immigrants.

The district containing parts of Houston and possessing an immigrant population larger than the national average (21.7% vs. 13.7 nationally in 2017) predicts that immigrant nonprofits will be very active in the district and play a key role integrating immigrants into local politics (spreading awareness of local political issues, explaining how to register to vote, etc.). Since the Latino population is higher than the 18-27% threshold established by Branton and Dunaway (32.1% in 2017), newspapers in the 2nd District will contain less stories about immigration relative to areas with a Latino population slightly below the aforementioned threshold. Moreover, the high Latino population would also predict that whites in the 2nd District would view immigration as a top concern. The large foreign-born Latino population in the 2nd District (40.5% vs. 33.5% nationally in 2017) would predict that Latinos in the district would likely view illegal immigration as an economic benefit compared to Latinos in other districts.

The prediction chosen to be tested is that since the 2nd District’s Latino population (32.1%) is larger than Branton and Dunaway’s 18-27% threshold, local newspapers will cover immigration stories less than areas with a Latino at or slightly below this threshold. This test will be conducted by first comparing a Houston-area newspaper to a newspaper in a nearby Texas market that has a Latino population at or below the threshold. Keeping the second market in Texas allows us to control for differences in state laws/rhetoric by politicians about immigration. Despite the government shutdown starting December 22nd, 2018, this study will start its analysis on December 11th, 2018 because of a high-profile argument between President Trump and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi that debated the amount of money appropriated to border security and likely started a spike in media coverage of immigration. This analysis will continue until January 25th, 2019, when the shutdown concluded, and include terms associated with the border security debate that caused the shutdown (“wall,” “shutdown,” “illegal immigration,” etc.). Moreover, positive aspects of immigration (reports of immigrants benefiting the country), neutral aspects (reports that do not declare a position) and negative aspects (crime stories, reports of economic competition with natives, social service use by undocumented immigrants, etc.) will be coded for in analysis of articles to see if a difference emerges between the two newspapers in tone. To assess the volume of stories, this analysis will observe the number of articles discussing immigration or the shutdown per day compared to the total number of articles published per day by each newspaper. Using proportions will be a better comparison because newspapers in Houston have a larger audience and likely more journalistic resources to print more stories than other areas of Texas.