Tag: news bias

In the article There Are No Jobs Americans Won’t Do the writers suggested that there are no occupations in the United States that are all foreign-born. Most immigrants work in construction, cleaning, maintenance, food service, garment manufacturing, and agricultural occupations. The writers found that these occupations consist of both legal and illegal immigrants and native-born citizens. Americans have a notion that Immigrants do jobs that most Americans won’t do such as farm work, however, the writers found that only 4 percent of illegal immigrants and 2 percent of all immigrants do agricultural work.  

The writers also conducted an analysis of occupations that are thought to be dominated by immigrants but are actually employing significantly more native-born citizens. The data conveys that 51 percent of native-born citizens are maids and housekeepers, 54 percent of native-born citizens are taxi drivers or chauffeurs, 64 percent of native-born citizens are butchers and meat processors, 65 percent of native-born citizens are construction laborers, and 73 percent of native-born citizens are janitors. The writers believe that high immigrant occupations are low wage jobs that require no formal education. However, not all immigrants are in industries that are low skilled. Thirty-eight percent of immigrants are software engineers, 28 percent are physicians and 7 percent are lawyers.

This article demonstrates that immigrants are being employed in American, but a higher percentage of native-born citizens are dominating the jobs in America. There are no jobs in the United States where occupation is all immigrants.  In addition, there are 24 occupations out of 474 in which illegal immigrant are among 15% of workers, whereas, 5.7% of native-born citizens are in high illegal immigrant occupations.

Camarota, Steven, et al. “There Are No Jobs Americans Won’t Do.” CIS.org, 26 Aug. 2018, cis.org/Report/There-Are-No-Jobs-Americans-Wont-Do.

This article analyses the immigration issue at the US and Mexico border from a rightist perspective. Similarly to the previous article I’ve analyzed, this piece showcases its bias within the title. The interview that is mentioned in this piece is heavily relied on for information and quotes. So much so, that the “country is full” quote is the sole basis of the article.

In comparison to the other article, this piece refers to the immigration and border debate as an “escalating crisis” rather than unauthorized immigration. Not to say one phrase is more correct than the other, but they are both emotionally driven phrases from different perspectives.

This article recalls Trump’s visit to the California border this past week. During his interview with Fox, the president stated that immigrants are “gaming the system” and it is because of the “Democrats and what they’ve done in terms of Congress.” This quote in and of itself is emotionally driven; however, it is how the author uses it that showcases the bias. The quote is in plain text amidst the body of the text and is spotlighted in bold directly beneath that. The bias comes from the author showcasing an abhorrently lambasted quote.

This article was biased and had very little contextual value aside from a single interview between a reporter and the president. There was little to know proven, factual information, aside from quotes, in this piece.

Mikelionis, Lukas. “Trump Declares ‘Country Is Full’ in Fox News Interview, Says US Can No Longer Accept Illegal Immigrants.” Fox News, FOX News Network, 6 Apr. 2019, www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-declares-the-country-full-in-fox-news-interview-says-american-can-no-longer-accept-illegal-immigrants.

After the inauguration of Donald Trump, many citizens believed that he will be capable of decreasing the unemployment rate. In the article, Without Immigrants, Trump’s Jobs Numbers Would be Much, Much Worse, writer Philip Bump focused on comparing Trump’s actions to economic recovery to Obama’s term. Bump began his article by mentioning that Obama came into the office when employment was suffering. When Obama took office, the unemployment rate for the United States was 7.8 percent. The peak unemployment rate when Obama was in office was 10 percent. During Trump’s term in office, the peak unemployment rate was 4.7 percent.

When this information was presented to Trump, Trump tweeted More people are working today in the United States, 158,000,000 than at any time in our Country’s history. That is a big deal.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ confirmed that the figure was actually under 157,000,000. However, the all-time high for employment did indeed occur in November 2018. Economist believe that the labor force increased as a result of an increase in population. Bump found from July 2016 to July 2018 the United States added 4 million people and 4.7 million jobs. Trump failed to acknowledge in his tweet that more than a third of employment went to immigrants. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ found that 17% of the people working in the United States were born in a foreign country. Researchers found, in 2017 the workforce consisted of 66% of foreign-born people that were able to work compared to 62% of American born citizens. The U.S. Census Bureau found the increase in population from 2010-2018 is a result of immigration.

Bump, Philip. “Without Immigrants, Trump’s Jobs Numbers Would Be Much, Much Worse.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 11 Mar. 2019, www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/11/without-immigrants-trumps-jobs-numbers-would-be-much-much-worse/?utm_term=.415e91b10e7a.

This article analyses the immigration issue at the US and Mexico border from a leftist perspective. Before even reading the content of the article, you get a hint of the bias from the title. The emotion-driven statement of “Trump struggles to curb unauthorized immigration” that then leads into a furtive explanation of how making changes of this scale are not quick and easy.

Immigration in the United States has been a topic of debate within the government and this article uses biased rhetoric to describe the current state of it. The wordage of this article may be biased, but its delivery isn’t obvious. The diction is subtle in this way by not directly saying what the overall message implies.

For example, the first paragraph introduces the subject matter: increased levels of unauthorized immigration. However, it states that halfway through Trump’s first term he is “searching for quick-fix solutions” that he and his administration has previously “promised to solve.” This implies that the president is taking a long time to deliver a promise while also looking for an effortless, easy-out fix too.

Another emotionally driven rhetoric would include the author’s depiction of the signing of a discord. The White House revoked the nomination of Ronald Vitiello for a lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement position. However, the author wrote that the White House yanked the nomination from the “longtime federal immigration official.” The author then added that Trump’s actions were “emblematic of the failures of a president whose policies have exacerbated the migration surge” and that his methods are “largely ineffective in keeping out the asylum-seeking families.”

This article features biases remarks and emotionally driven phrases.

Nakamura, David, and Seung Min Kim. “As Trump Struggles to Curb Unauthorized Immigration, His Rhetoric Gets Tougher, but Quick Solutions Are Elusive.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 6 Apr. 2019, www.washingtonpost.com/politics/as-trump-struggles-to-curb-unauthorized-immigration-his-rhetoric-gets-tougher-but-quick-solutions-are-elusive/2019/04/06/8780ac92-57b7-11e9-814f-e2f46684196e_story.html?utm_term=.aeb6c36252c5.

There is a lot of negativity when it comes to hiring refugees for work. But last year, a recent study from News Deeply showed that hiring refugees for employment is actually good for business. Although it may seem like a win-win situation, the article is bias. Many places that have hired refugees feel that there is more diversity and less ignorance in the workplace. More culture will be in the workplace, which is good because then all employees and employers grow their company and bring new things into the company depending on what the business is. Not only that, there is more work to done for a growing company. This is a major plus because this means better pay for employees. Refugees will have a positive outcome when hired for employment. They will feel welcome and feel they have a place and role in society, no matter what country. They will also get more experience from countries outside of their native country. This is good for them because they will become more involved and a well-rounded individual. The money would make great use for things such as welfare. Both sides will benefit because the employers and employees will see business from different perspectives. In this way, both the employers and employees can learn different things from each other. More refugees will be able to feel more comfortable if they are hired in a place outside of their country. The fact that more refugees who are hired in the same workplace will feel better because they won’t feel like outsiders.

 

Sikorski, Natalie. “Why Hiring Refugees Is Good for Business”, News Deeply, 19, Jun 2018. https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/community/2018/06/19/why-hiring-refugees-is-good-for-business

It’s safe to say that it’s difficult to find a job when you’re an immigrant. And now in certain countries, it’s hard to find employment because the countries are now using their money to make sure these refugees stay out. A recent report discovered by US News suggest that countries are spending way too much money on banning refugees from coming into their country. We can see these patterns in different parts of Europe and North America. There is some bias in this report. Apparently, countries who spend more money on keeping refugees out is hurting their economy because those governments are so focused on keeping the door closed for migrants, that they won’t get a chance to work. With that being said, they won’t have taxes to pay, nor will they get the need for welfare, which decreases the chances of the government getting more money. In this way, governments of these countries lose money and time because of how much effort goes into keeping them out, rather than giving them employment and gaining welfare. Refugees getting jobs results in income, which then leads to enough for social services and welfare, this also equals to the government getting money. Not only do the countries themselves become negatively affected, but the refugees as well. The idea that refugees can’t get a job in non-native countries make them become discouraged and feel that they do not have a place in society. This is a lose-lose situation for both sides because the government doesn’t get as much money and refugees feel more like outsiders.

Shinkman, Paul, D. “Refugees Are Coming. Should They Work?”, US News, 19 Sept 2018. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2018-09-19/study-banning-refugees-from-working-costs-countries-millions.

A published story on Vox.com by Tara Golshan called “Trump: the US will not turn into a ‘migrant camp’ or ‘refugee holding facility’” in which the discussion of the governments involvement in accepting refugees is the topic. The article discusses President Trumps resistance to accept immigrants and refugees “unlike some of the its European allies.” There is a large comparison between the U.S. and the Germany. Germanies accepting of refugees is creating political backlash towards their Chancellor. The article attempts to go in depth on certain policies Trump has placed against refugees and gives facts about other refugee statistics in the United Nations. The article is highly political creating a lot of bias. While it mostly focuses on Trump Administration it also discusses which political party is blaming the other for issues of immigration and family separation. This article is filled with bias. While there are true statements and facts, the article is also very one sided, only focusing on sources against Trump. The limited sources and variety of sources shows the purpose of this article is to show people a negative spotlight on immigration and refugee policy and treatment. This article shows the side of immigration where the United States is hurting and ignoring refugees and immigrants instead of helping them. While immigrants can experience a new and better life in America, they will face many challenges and some of these will be against the government and policies itself.

Golshan, Tara. “Trump: The US Will Not Turn into a ‘Migrant Camp’ or ‘Refugee Holding Facility.'” Vox, 18 June 2018, www.vox.com/2018/6/18/17475512/trump-migrant-camp-refugee-germany.

While there are many people fighting for the asylum system for refugees, there are also opposing sides fighting against the asylum system. In a recent comment, Trump said that Congress needs to get rid of the whole asylum system and should get rid of immigration judges.

Trump administration has already been implementing policies to limit asylum opportunities for refugees. For example, they partnered with Mexico forcing asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their hearing before an immigration judge. They started a process called “metering,” which limits the number of asylum seekers who are processed in the US immigration system. As a result of this, many migrants were waiting on the other side of the border for even that initial step in the process. They also have a “Zero Tolerance policy” which criminally charges any migrant who illegally crossed into the United States. This policy then led to child separation sent children to shelters while their parents waited in a detention cell for a court hearing.

The problem with all of these policies is that America is a founded as a place for refugees. California Gov. Gavin Newsom expressed how this country has been a safe haven for people fleeing oppression and violence. Under U.S law, any migrant is entitled to ask for asylum, and if they have a legitimate reason to fear for their safety in their home country, they’ll be given a hearing. Trump’s statements to get rid of the asylum system goes completely against this law.

Source:

Itkowitz, Colby. 2019, April 5. Trump congress needs to get rid of the whole asylum system. The Washington Post. Retrieved from washingtonpost.com/…/700eac1a-57a5-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.