Content-Type: text/html Reinforcing stereotypes: Press coverage about immigrants by the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune, 1985-1994 submitted by: Katrin Pomper E.W. Scripps School of Journalism Ohio University 74 1/2 West Union Street Athens, OH 45701 Tel: 614-589-5017 e-mail: [log in to unmask] Reinforcing stereotypes: Press coverage about immigrants by the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune, 1985 to 1994. Abstract: This paper examined three major U.S. dailies concerning coverage about immigrants over a time period of 15 years. All papers devoted the most coverage towards illegal immigrants. A shift in coverage about immigrants from the 1980s to the 1990s was observed. The greatest attention in their reporting received Hispanic and Asian immigrants while immigrants from Canada and Oceania were left out. European immigrants were covered only during a short time period after the breakdown of the Eastern Bloc. Illegal immigrants were most mentioned in association with crime, government or foreign affairs activities. 1. Introduction: The United States is the home country of people with the most diverse backgrounds. It is considered the immigration country per se. Some 55 million people have come to the US since English immigrants established a settlement (Simon, Alexander, 1993). The origin of the immigrants has changed over the times. Europeans arrived during the last until the middle of this century. After the number of Europeans decreased in the 1960s people coming from Central and South America and the Caribbean superseded them. In the decades of the 1970s and 1980s more people from Asia immigrated to the U.S. With the political changes in the former Eastern Bloc countries a temporary wave of immigrants (mainly Jews) arrived in this country. During the 1990s the newly arrived come from the South, mainly Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. Political turmoil and economic problems caused the recent influx of Hispanic immigrants. Five groups of immigrants reached peaks in their numbers of arrivals Reinforcing stereotypes... during the last ten years: Caribbean's (including Cubans) in 1988, Filipinos, Chinese and Mexicans in 1989 (Statistical Abstract, 1990). Throughout US history there has been a tendency to assimilate people of different cultural backgrounds and races into the American "melting pot." Individuals gave up their identity in order to join the mainstream. This theory of the "melting pot" suggested that cultures blended together to form American citizens (Glazer, 1963). Due to the undiminished continuous stream of new immigrants the "salad bowl" concept became more and more acceptable in recent years. It holds that the various cultures maintain their own identity while contributing to American culture as a whole (D'Innocenzo, 1992). If one looks to states such as Texas, California, and Florida, one recognizes the increasing importance of Spanish as a second language. One can find individuals who are living in the United States but do not speak English because their living environment does not require it of them. Critics predict cultural infiltration and a loss of living standard for U.S. workers. Another argument states that the high number of immigrants will reduce job opportunities. Particularly the influx of illegal immigrants crossing the border in the South stirs public fears. As a result, the Mexican-American border is on the way to becoming North Americans "Berlin Wall." In the process of constructing this threatening image of illegal immigrants and immigrants in general in the American public, the media plays an important role. How can it be that in a nation founded by immigrants, the resistance towards new immigrants, no matter if legal or illegal, is rising. One reason can be found in the gatekeeper function of the media. Through the dissemination of more and more negative images of immigrants in the American news media this stereotype will be reinforced. Mostly negative news about immigrants reaches the news columns of papers or air time of broadcasters. Wilson and Gutierez claimed that "the perspective of American values, attitudes and ambitions brought to society have largely been Reinforcing stereotypes... those of gatekeepers and others with access to the media" (Wilson and Gutierez, 1995). Information concerning people of color that does not get processed through the media is filtered, almost entirely through members of the dominant Anglo-culture. Initially, people of color (Native Americans, Blacks, Latinos, and Asians alike) were excluded from news reports. However, their continuing presence and increasing number soon leads to their being reported as threats to society. Depending on the group the overall image is positive or negative. Asians are generally described as hard working, well educated and successful entrepreneurs. The stereotypes portray Hispanics as poor, dependent on welfare and resistant to American culture (keeping their language). 2. Statement of the problem: This study examined contemporary news coverage about immigrants in the U.S. One should assume that in a nation of immigrants this is not supposed to be a big issue. However, public sentiments and discussions about whether to allow or restrict the flow of immigrants indicates that the issue is still a "hot topic," particularly if one wants to gain votes in elections. The question this study addressed is how the press covered legal and illegal immigrants from 1985 to 1994. Major immigration legislation such as the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 whose objective was to reduce illegal immigration occurred during this period. It forbade emploment of illegal aliens. Another bill, however a more liberal one, passed the Congress in 1990, which allowed the admission of 700,000 immigrants per year until 1994. It also provided Salvadorans with protected status for a limited time period. Despiote protective legislation public opinion on immigrants is increasingly hostile. While surveys in 1965 indicated that 23 percent of the respondents wanted to keep out refugees, the number increased to 49 percent in 1975 and 66 percent in 1980 (Simon and Reinforcing stereotypes... Alexander, 1993). The image of certain groups of immigrants in the public shows great differences. While Asians and Europeans are more preferred, Hispanic groups receive unfavorable ratings. Cubans (9%), Haitians (10%), and Mexicans (25%) are considered as bad for the United States and therefore ranked at the end of the popularity scale. Japanese (47%), Chinese (44 %), Poles (53 %), and Germans (57 %) receive better evaluations by the American public (Simon and Alexander, 1993). The news media contributed to the formation of the overall negative and threatening picture of immigrants. It associates immigrants with crime, increasing job competition and infiltration of new cultural values. This study investigated how the press portrayed the immigrants during the 1980s and 1990s. Is there a correlation of coverage and public opinion about immigrants? Are there shifts in the coverage? Which group of immigrants gets the most attention? In what context does the press report about immigrants? Are there similar patterns of coverage newspapers? Does the location of a paper influence the coverage about immigrants? In other words, is the ethnic population a factor in the news selection process? Does the press favor a certain group of immigrants? These are questions this study tried to answer Previous studies of newspaper portrayed of Latinos and Asians-Americans revealed a pattern of distorted, unrepresentative and demeaning coverage. The same can be said about the racist image the press has provided about African Americans in the past. This content analysis focused on coverage of immigrants in the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Los Angeles Times to determine if this overall impression has changed and if so in which direction. Wilson and Gutierez assert that for the most part "the mass media treated groups (Latinos, Asians, Native Americans and African Americans - the author) not in the mass audience by ignoring or stereotyping them" (Wilson and Gutierez, 1995). Reinforcing stereotypes... 3. Literature Review: Coverage of minorities and immigrants The coverage of special groups or minorities has been subject of considerable research. A few studies especially looked at immigrants. Martindale examined the coverage of Black Americans in the New York Times over a period of 50 years. As a result, she concluded that the mainstream press has presented minorities as outside rather than as a part of American society. In the beginning Blacks were only covered by the media when they caused problems for white society. The papers gave relative inattention to black problems, and the cases of black protest in the 1960s seemed to indicate that the papers failed to provide readers with background information. The quality became better in the 1970s. Martindale's second study concerning the portrayal of minority groups confirms that some were initially invisible in the news. However, in the 1990s coverage climbed sharply especially for Latinos. Unfortunately, the very large percentage of the articles was devoted to crime committed by Latinos, Martindale analyzed. She also noted the same pattern for Asian Americans. Ma and Hildebrand explored how the Canadian Press reported about the ethnic Chinese community over a time period of 20 years. They observed that the amount of coverage and diversity of stories grew dramatically. However, the largely positive slant of most 1970s stories was later balanced by neutral and negative coverage. Cultural stories were augmented by crime, economics and immigration stories which led to negative coverage. The number of news items in papers increased and so did the size of the Chinese community. Another finding of Ma's and Hildebrand's study is a shift in topics. Traditional stories such as features on lifestyle, food, cultural themes gave way to hard news and opinions. The basis of Simon and Alexander's book was a study of major U.S. magazines, newspapers, legislation and public opinion polls concerning immigrants over a time period of Reinforcing stereotypes... 100 years (1880-1990). It documents tension, ambivalence and confusion presented by the print media regarding immigration politics in the United States. The authors thoroughly show, how each new group of immigrants is viewed as undesirable. These immigrants frequently characterized as aliens to American culture, because they possess different cultural values, speak different languages, and have lifestyles which are resistant to assimilation. Some of the stirred fears Simon and Alexander report are the dilution of the cultural strength of America (language), criminal tendencies, increasing job competition with Americans or, their effect on public welfare rolls. The media, the authors argue, increasingly distinguished between legal and illegal.The researchers claimed that the New York Times was less proimmigrant than other publications. Throughout the 1980s Simon and Alexander found the paper was concerned with the U.S. treatment of those seeking refugee status. It expressed sympathy for Haitians, but did not support granting them refugee status. The New York Times also expressed concerns that illegal immigrants take jobs. On the other hand, it acknowledged that illegals work hard, pay taxes, and used few government services (Simon and Alexander, 1993). Brosius and Eps examined the impact of the four key events on the news selection in the case of violence against aliens and asylum seekers in Germany. The researchers found similar quantitative aftermath coverage in print and electronic media. Not only the amount of coverage peaked after the key events occurred, but also the shape of the reporting. In another study Heeter, Greenberg, Mendelson, Burgoon, Burgoon, and Korzemy investigated the cross media coverage of Hispanics in American news. During a constructed week in September 1980 Hispanic representation in six papers, five radio and television stations in Southwestern cities was analyzed. The authors found that crime coverage was dominated in radio. Newspapers had the highest frequency of stories per issue. The city with the highest Hispanic population dedicated more news space to coverage of Hispanic people. Reinforcing stereotypes... Public opinion towards minorities and immigrants It is widely known that increasing immigration (not only in the US) sparked off a public discussion about whether to stop the influx through restrictions or to welcome the new immigrants. The power of the media in the agenda setting process should not be underestimated. Some studies have focused on the relation of media and public attitude about immigration. Hofstetter and Loveman conducted 500 telephone interviews, asking people about their attitudes towards immigration into the U.S. (Hofstetter and Loveman, 1982). Then they compared their answers with the media exposure of the interviewees. As a result, Hofstetter and Loveman found a high level of consistency in attitudes towards immigrants from various areas of the world. Attitudes to immigrants from the Middle East were least consistent. Respondents in San Diego viewed immigrants from Canada, Western Europe and Africa as not having particular effect and in positive terms. Attitudes towards immigrants from Mexico were highly hostile. Respondents perceived the impact of undocumented immigration primarily in economic terms. Gunter conducted a national telephone survey over two months about how people view the coverage of social groups in the media. He found the group involvement of the respondent was an important predictor of credibility judgment. The higher the involvement was, the more unfavorable coverage was perceived. The print media was the most trusted medium. A more descriptive picture illustrates the article by Bailon, the president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (Bailon, 1995). He claims that the national media has helped to foster an atmosphere of anti-immigration hysteria. According to Bailon, Latinos especially are portrayed as economical burdens. Immigrants are seldom a source for the reporter because of the inability of journalists to speak the immigrant's language. Bailon continues to criticize the lack of depth in the reporting. Although print media is not excellent in dealing with the issue, papers and magazines are less biased, concludes Bailon. Reinforcing stereotypes... Miller confirmed that whenever immigrants make the news it is always in a negative context. Cued by popular sentiments, the governors of California, Florida, Texas, and Arizona have sued the federal government for billions of dollars to recover costs those states have spent on illegal immigrants. Miller calls on the media to improve the quality of reporting and ease worries about immigrants. 4. Research questions: This study compared three major U.S. newspapers in their coverage of immigrants over a time period of ten years. The newspapers were chosen according to their importance and size. Another factor was the geographical location which could influence the coverage either in positive or negative terms. All three newspapers cover cities that were or are still traditional places of immigration. Hypothetically, it could be argued that cities with a high percentage of foreign born citizens have greater interest in news about immigrants. This could be reflected in a higher quantity of articles. Another question this study examined was which group of immigrants received the most coverage in all three papers: legal or illegals? Was there a change in the amount of coverage within the ten years? What were the topics with which immigrants are most associated? Which ethnic group received the highest attention by the press? Was there a stereotypic pattern of reporting about certain groups of immigrants in all three papers? Finally, was there is an association between news coverage of a certain group and the location of the newspaper carrying that coverage? 5. Methodology: Three newspapers were selected for this study according to their importance as national opinion leaders, their circulation and direct involvement in immigration aspects caused through Reinforcing stereotypes... geographical location. These newspapers were the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Los Angels Times. Among these three papers the New York Times has the highest circulation number with 1.012.915 million, followed by the Los Angeles Times with 993.675, and Chicago Tribune with 678.081 items per weekday. All three cities are characterized by a high percentage of foreign born population. New York has within its city limits 2.300.047 people whose birthplace is located outside the U.S. Los Angeles and Chigago have 1.767.900 and 469.187 people within their city limits who were born outside the U.S. (Census of population and Housing, 1990; Editor and Publisher Yearbook, 1995). As one can see these papers are located in traditional immigration areas. Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune are very large local newspapers. The New York Times is both a local as well as a national paper. It is an elite newspaper because its read by many decision makers in this country and abroad. A ten-year time period was examined for each newspaper. During that time Congress passed at two major bills concerning immigration in 1986 and 1990. Additionally, new refugees from El Salvador, Cuba, Haiti, East Europe as well as China arrived in the U.S. The sample consisted of 296 cases. The sample was drawn out of the index of each newspaper until 1988 under the term "Immigration." Starting from 1989 the sample was selected with the help of the Nexis/Lexis search program. Every 10th story was selected. Because of numerous editions of all papers the sample was chosen from the late edition of the New York Times, the home edition of the Los Angeles Times and the final and sports edition of the Chicago Tribune. All sections of the paper were included in the selection process of the items. Each article was regarded separately and coded for section/page, type, news source, major player of the article, number of references to groups and main topic. All textual items were measured by counting the paragraphs. Photographs and infographics were simply counted. Reinforcing stereotypes... The following categories were established to identify the items: I. Section/Page: For this coders determined whether the items appeared on the front page, in the first section of the paper (other than front page), on the editorial page or in any other section of the paper. The other sections included metropolitan, business, lifestyle and feature sections. II. Type of Story: The type of story determined whether the item was identified as a news story, an editorial, a feature or other (letter to the editor, an editorial cartoon etc.). Editorials in this context included all opinion pieces or analysis stories written about immigrants. Features included human interest stories, personality profiles etc. III. News Source: The news source category determined whether the item was provided by a news agency/wire service, by a correspondent, a staff-writer, a non-staff-writer or other. Non-staffers were experts such as university professors or representatives of the government or its agencies. The term "other" counted for private persons who wrote letters to the editor. IV. Major Player: This term was used to identify who stands in the center of the article. There were four options: legal, illegal, both (related to immigrants), and other. Federal government or Congressional representatives, for example, counted for other. V. Number of References: Here the coder had to decide which group of immigrants according to geographical origin was mentioned in the item. Multiple choices were possible. Number 10 referred to a more or less neutral mentioning of immigrants without differentiation into legal nor illegal immigrants. The term other counted for government officials. VI. Main Topic of the Article: The 15 standardized subcategories used by Stempel were employed. Only one choice was possible. The term "other" applied for articles about culture. To test reliability, four students coded 20 news items of the New York Times. The overall intercoder reliability was 90.9 %. The percentage of agreement in determining type, source and length of items was 95 %. Agreements on the paper, date and art were 100 %. The level of significance for this study was set at 0.05. Reinforcing stereotypes... 6. Results: The random sample of 296 items consisted of 76 articles from the New York Times, 130 from the Los Angeles Times and 90 from the Chicago Tribune. Out of the 296 articles, 34 (11.5%) items were placed on the front page. The majority of 158 (53.4 %) were found in the first section of the paper. A total of 35 (11.8 %) items were assigned to the editorial section. Finally, 69 (23.3 %) were placed in the other sections of the paper. Overall a total of 66 articles were illustrated with one or more photos. In 28 items infographics were found. Of the 296 items, 155 (52.4 %) were written by staff members of the papers, 51 (17.2 %) were provided by the wire services, 44 (14.9 % ) by others, 27 (9.1 %) by correspondents and 19 (6.4 %) by non-staffers. Surprisingly, out of the total sample of 296 items 107 (36.1 %) were dedicated to legal immigrants, 83 (28 %) to illegal immigrants, 27 (9.1 %) to both and 79 (26.7 %) to other. In all three papers there was no reference made to Canadian and Oceanian immigrants. Table 1: Overall references to groups Group: Number % Canada 0 0 West Europe 16 5.4 East Europe 32 10.8 Africa 16 5.4 Asia 65 22.0 Latin America/Caribbean 99 33.4 Mexico 82 27.7 Middle East 19 6.4 Oceania 0 0 Immigrants in general 80 27.0 Other 10 3.4 Total: 296 100.0 Reinforcing stereotypes... Table 1 shows Hispanics and Asians received the greatest attention by the press. In contrast to this, there was no article about immigrants from Canada or Oceania during the analysed time period. West European and African immigrants did not atract the media either. This overall result indicates the press reports unproportional about Hispanic immigrants. For the public (readers) it seems all immigrants come from either Mexico, Latin America or the Caribbean. As a result, the press delivers an unrealistic and subjective picture of reality to its audience. As the author hypothesized was the distribution of the topic concerning immigrants. Table 2: Overall Distribution of topics Topic: Number: % Politics/Government 110 37.2 Diplomacy/Foreign affairs 40 13.5 Agriculture 0 0 Crime 34 11.5 Accidents/Disaster 8 2.7 Health 8 2.7 War and Defense 3 1.0 Economic Activities 26 8.8 Transport/Travel 3 1.0 Public Moral Problem 3 1.0 Education/Classic Art 10 3.4 General Human Interest 25 8.4 Other 26 8.8 Total: 296 100.0 The previous table gives information in which context the three papers cover immigranys. While immigration is a political issue, the main focus of reporting is on government and politics as well as foreign affairs. Immigrants are generally mentioned in association with government regulations or agreements with other countries concerning Reinforcing stereotypes... immigration. The third rank of coverage about immigration is crime. Unfortunately, this pattern reinforces the public opinion about immigrants and does not contribute to a better image. Other underlaying topics of news reporting are economic activities and human interest issues. However, compared to the other amount, the percentage of coverage is low. In order to see differences of quantitative coverage among the three papers the ten year time period was collapsed into two five years sections. here, the differences and shifts in the coverage were clear to see. Table 3: Distribution legal/illegal immigrants by paper 1985 - 1989 legal illegal Number: % Number: % New York Times 11 40.7 16 59.3 Los Angeles Times 34 70.8 14 29.2 Chicago Tribune 25 69.4 11 30.6 Total: 70 100 41 100 x = 7.64 df= 2 p< 0.02 1990 - 1994 legal illegal Number: % Number: % New York Times 7 26.9 19 73.1 Los Angeles Times 12 44.4 15 55.6 Chicago Tribune 18 69.2 8 30.8 Total: 37 100 42 100 x = 9.439 df = 2 p < 0.008 Reinforcing stereotypes... The table indicates a significant shift in the coverage towards more about illegal immigrants. Except the Chicago Tribune the papers tend to report more about illegal immigrants. This finding additionally supports the hypothesis that the press parallels public opinion, where the discussion about illegal immigrants is already overheated. The press does not make any efforts to correct this image. The trend is more obvious if one collapses all three papers together and compares the change towards more coverage about illegal immigrants. The percentages show a significant move towards more reporting about illegal immigrants. In othe words, the press reinforces the distorted image about immigration. Table 4: Distribution legal/illegal immigrants by time 1985 - 1989 1990 - 1994 Number: % Number: % legal 70 63.1 37 46.8 illegal 41 36.9 42 53.2 Total: 111 100 79 100 x = 4.9411 df = 1 p < .05 The next table shows the coverage preferences of the papers toward certain groups of immigrants. Hispanic immigrants received in both time periods the highest media attention.This indicates a racist reporting of all examined papers. Europeans, people from Oceania and Canada do not matter. They are close to American culture. People of color whose culture differs is represented by the pres as a threat. Reinforcing stereotypes... Table 5: Mention of a group by time: 1985-1989 1990-1994 Number: % Number: % Canada 0 0 0 0 West Europe 7 5.0 7 5.0 East Europe 22 14.2 10 7.1 Africa 5 3.2 11 7.8 Asia 32 20.6 33 23.4 Latin America/Caribbean 48 31.0 51 36.2 Mexico 43 27.7 39 27.7 Middle East 12 7.7 7 5.9 Oceania 0 0 0 0 Immigrants general 35 22.6 45 31.9 Other 5 3.2 5 3.5 x = 12.34 df = 10 p< 0.232 (not significant) The next table shows that the preferences of coverage about a certain group of immigrants are similar among the papers. Hispanics (Mexican and Latin Americans including the Caribbean) were most mentioned in the papers, followed by Asians and East Europeans. Table 6: Mention of a group by paper New York Times Los Angeles Times Chicago Tribune Number: % Number: % Number: % Oceania 0 0 0 0 0 0 West Europe 6 7.9 7 5.4 3 3.3 East Europe 7 9.2 11 8.5 14 15.6 Africa 6 7.4 3 2.3 7 7.8 Asia 18 23.7 29 22.3 18 20.0 LatAm./Car. 23 30.3 43 33.1 33 36.7 Mexico 19 25.0 42 32.3 21 23.3 Middle East 6 7.9 4 3.1 9 10.0 Oceania 0 0 0 0 0 0 Immigrants G. 23 30.3 39 30.0 18 20.0 Other 3 3.9 1 0.8 6 6.7 x = 23.56 df = 10 p > .01 (significant) Reinforcing stereotypes... The next table shows the context (topic) in which legal or illegal or both are mentioned most. It indicates that the press reinforces the overall image of immigrants in the public. The group of legal is mentioned in relation with government activities or within the context of Foreign Affairs. There are also 13 items about economic activities and 6 about crime. When compared with the group of illegal immigrants, the emphasis was quiet the opposite.There were 22 crime stories and 4 stories about economic activities which have a reference to illegals. However, the number of articles related to government is as high as for legals. Both groups together are mostly mentioned in contexts of government activities. Table 7: association of group by topic legal illegal both Number: % Number: % Number: % Politics/Gov. 18 16.8 26 31.3 12 44.4 Dipl./For.Aff. 23 21.5 11 13.3 1 3.7 Agriculture 0 0 0 0 0 0 Crime 6 5.6 22 26.5 1 3.7 Accidents/Dis. 3 2.8 4 4.8 0 0 Public Health 2 1.9 0 0 1 3.7 Popular Amus. 0 0 0 0 0 0 War/Defense 0 0 1 1.2 1 3.7 Economic Act. 13 12.1 4 4.8 5 18.5 Transp./Travel 0 0 1 1.2 1 3.7 Public Moral 0 0 1 1.2 0 0 Science 0 0 0 0 0 0 Education 8 7.5 1 1.2 1 3.7 Human Interest 14 13.1 14 12.0 1 3.7 Other 20 18.7 2 2.4 3 11.1 Total: 107 100.0 87 100.0 27 100.0 Reinforcing stereotypes... 7. Conclusion: Generally, the frequencies of mentioning a certain group of immigrants indicated that Hispanics (Latin Americans, Caribbeans, and Mexicans together) received the highest media attention during the examined time period. Clearly a pattern was found in the topic choice. The most items about immigrants dealt with either government activities or foreign affairs, followed by crime and economic activities. This picture, dismissed by the three papers, fits exactly the public image of immigrants. In other words, the press overcovers Asian and Hispanic immigrants, but almost ignores Europeans. This indicates a crearly racist pattern. As stated before, the number of items that dealt with illegal immigrants rose in the 1990s compared to the 1980s. This shift in coverage parallels the increasingly negative image of this group. Looking at each paper, this trend can be confirmed, except for the Chicago Tribune. Here, the majority of articles were concerned with legal immigrants. One has to take in consideration Chicago's location, far from borders to the South, and its role as a traditional arrival point for European immigrants. With this shift in coverage towards more illegal immigrants the press helps to keep the public fears alive. All three papers have the same preferences in covering a special group of immigrants. New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune run most of their stories with references to either Latin Americans or Mexicans. However, it was remarkable that the New York Times decreased its coverage about Mexicans from the 1980s to the 1990s. Instead, it increased the coverage about Asian immigrants, which has more relevance to the location of New York in the 1990s. Overall, Asians are ranked second in the coverage of the papers. In the case of the Los Angeles Times the amount of coverage about Asian immigrants shrank. East European immigrants ranked third in the overall coverage of all three papers because of the breakdown of the Eastern Bloc at the end of the 1980s. The quantity of articles about this Reinforcing stereotypes... group however decreased in the second period. Remarkable and worth mention is the fact that the frequently a general reference is made to immigrants instead of naming a spezific group. Particularly the Los Angeles Times has the highest number of such articles. A very strong support of the author's hypothesis was found in the analysis of topics versus group of immigrants. Legal as well as illegal immigrants were most often mentioned in the context of government activities and foreign affairs. While legal were third most mentioned with economic activities, consequently in more positive terms, illegals were third most mentioned in the context of crime. This main finding strongly confirms the assumption that the media (press) reinforces the stereotypes which are existing in the public. This becomes even more obvious if one compares certain groups of immigrants with the context in which they are mentioned most. The table in the appendix indicates that Mexicans more likely to be mentioned with crime and Asians with economic activities. Summarizing all the findings, one can say that coverage about immigrants in the print media was not improving. The papers failed to address, except the Chicago Tribune , public hostility to immigrants. Instead, they associated illegals with crime and legals with economic benefit and hard work. The papers also follow a pattern of a slightly racist coverage. Europeans are not a concern; however, Hispanics and Asians are because they are seperated from American culture and therefore more threatening. Overall, this study offers a gloomy picture of immigration coverage. Even America's most elite paper, the New York Times, and two other major dailies reflect public bias against immigrants. For future studies a comparison with the electronic media is desirable. Additionally, the author thinks that instead of a sample all articles or a larger sample should be included in the analysis. This will give a more accurate picture. 8. Bibliography: Books: D'Innocenzo, Michael and Sirfeman, Joseph.: Immigration and Ethnicity. American Society - "Melting Pot" or "Salad Bowl?" Greenwood Press: 1992. Editor and Publisher Yearbook, 1995 Simon, Rita J. and Alexander, Susan H.: The Ambivalent Welcome: Print Media, Public Opinion and Immigration. Westport, CT: Preager, 1993. Wilson, Clint C. and Gutierez, Felix: Race, Multiculturalism, and the Media: From Mass to Class Communication. Sage Publications, 1995. Wilson Clint C. and Gutierez, Felix: Minorities and the Media: Diversity and the End of Mass Communication. Sage Publication, 1985 US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census: Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1990. Washington D.C., US Government Printing Office, 1990. Articles: Bailon, Gilbert: "Immigration issue provoke poor reporting by the press." In: ASNE Bulletin, March 1995, p.42-43. Brosius, H.-B. and Eps, P.: "Prototyping through key events: news selection in the case of violence against aliens and asylum seekers in Germany." In: European Journal of Communication, 10 (3, 1995): 391-412. Gunther, Albert C.: "Biased Press or Biased Public? Attitudes toward Media Coverage of Social Groups." In: Public Opinion Quarterly, 56 (1992): 147-167. Ma, Jianming and Hildebrand, Kai: "Canadian Press Coverage of Ethnic Chines Community; A Content Analysis of The Toronto Star and the Vancouver Sun, 1970-1990." In: Canadian Journal of Communication. 18 (1993): 479-496. Heeter, Carrie; Greenberg, Bradley S.; Mendelson, Bradley E.; Burgoon, Judee K.; Burgoon, Micheal and Korzemy Felipe: "Cross Media Coverage of Local Hispanic American News." In: Journal of Broadcasting. 27 (4 Fall): 395-403. Hofstetter, Richard C. and Loveman, Brian: "Media Exposure and Attitude Consistency about Immigrattion." In: Journalism Quarterly 59 (2, summer ): 298-302. Martindale, Carolyn: "Coverage of Black American in five newspapers since 1950." In: Journalism Quarterly. 62 (2, summer): 321-328, 436. Martindale, Carloyn: "Only in Glimpses: Portrayal of America's largest Minority Groups by the New York Times, 1934 -1994.", Paper presented AEJMC Annual Convention, Washington, D.C., 1995 Miller, John J.: "Immigration, the Press and the New Racism." In: Media Studies Journal, 8, 3(summer, 1994): 19-28. CD-ROM: Census of Population and Housing, 1990 9. Appendix: