[Watch clip]
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6022424537001/#sp=show-clips
This video shows a Fox news reporter interviewing people in a cafe in Missouri about the immigration problem in the U.S. and other issues salient to them. One of the men speak about how the immigration problem at the border is clear to him and those living there because they see it all the time whereas at a national level people think it is more abstract / not as real. This seems to connect to Hopkins’ concept of politicized places as the national discussion of immigration as an issue has connected to this man’s experience and made it more salient. You can see below the chevron of the newscast that this is part of Fox’s discussion of the 2020 election and ‘the issues’ that matter in relation to it.
Discussion questions:
- Using the language of agenda-setting, framing, and priming, how does the media impact the political decision-making of U.S. voters? You can use this clip as an example to apply the framework to.
I think the interview with one of the construction guys was a good example of the salience of place. However I also find it interesting that Kansas City is a long ways from the border so I wonder what the implications of these people who are far from the border but interact heavily with immigrants would be for Branton and Dunaway’s argument. I wonder if a happy medium exists between the two pieces that looks at proximity to immigration population clusters or normal routes of immigration that would still include the southern border but extend vertically upward to places like Kansas City