Biasness in the News Media Channels

It has long been argued that Fox News and CNN television outlets are more partisan than ideological (Westgate 83). Occasionally, both are seen to be the host of conservative philosophies, but constitutionally, the Republican and Democratic parties are their cynoses. With Donald's rise to the presidency and the Democratic Party's rise to the opposition, the political inclination of these media houses has become very clear in the public domain. It is because of such scandals that the television outlets associated with specific political parties have come out heavily to sell the ideas of the political leaders they back. They do this despite the idea being contrary to the profession journalism standards.
Republican BiasedWestgate (83) asserts that Fox News has constantly been perceived to champion for Trump’s ideas of combating illegal immigrants. This is exemplified not only in their headlines which are purposefully chosen, but also in the kind of debates they hold. Fundamentally, illegal immigration is an act of policy violation. Westgate (91) further states that it is upon the US citizens to regulate who is admitted legally and he who is refused an entry. The total number of the illegal immigrants is currently between 11-13 million people and in the recent past, there has been a steady annual increase of the number by half a million. However, the presence of these people has been a burden not only to the American states but also to the Federal Government, the laden majorly being on the economy. For instance, educating the illegal immigrants’ children in Pennsylvania is reported to cost the state as high as $230 million annually. Besides, with the inclusion of incarceration and medical expenses, the cost shoots to $285 million. It is estimated that by 2020, the cost may rise to $ 812 million considering the steady rise in the number of these immigrants.Gil, Homero, Correa & Velenzuela (599) contend that it is regrettable to point out that this fiscal cost is only but a fraction of the total costs that can be attributed to the immigration of the aliens. The fiscal burden by the American taxpayers is likely to rise higher than the above estimates if full costs of administering justice are to be considered. The trials, policing, medical and interpretation costs if considered would greatly expand the total funds required to host the illegal immigrants. Estimations of the incarceration costs are normally based on the reports from the federal government for compensation under the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP). According to Beyer & Matthes (843), the report from SCAAP is only but a small representative of the actual expenditures. It is because of such inaccuracy that some jurisdictions have allegedly reached a decision that the paperwork is not worth the strain. Similarly, the estimations of the resources spent on the children of these deportable aliens such as welfare benefits could further increase the public expenses. For instance, the costs of special kind of education to most of these children if accounted for, turn out to be very expensive. Most of the learners have Limited English Proficiency (LEP) and therefore should be entitled to special coaching. Between 1996 and 2005, there was a drop in the overall registration right from Kindergarten to grade 12. Precisely, the drop was 7.7% as opposed to the enrolment in the LEP classes which doubled by 96.4%.Democratic BiasedThe September 11 attacks on the US soil had great impact on the country’s security landscape (Hong 47). Hong (49) illustrates that the topographical suspicion on people’s belonging and suspicion has greatly affected members of the Arab community. Negligence and low intelligence at the borders have always been blamed for the terrorist’s attacks. In order to curb the menace, the US government is obliged to look beyond mere border scrutiny of visitors. Gil et al (612) assert that it is for this reason that president Trump signed an executive order which barred the admission of refugees from seven major Muslim countries. This is the only avenue of making America rise again amidst threats from ISIS and countries like North Korea. In this case, the pertinent issue is that majority of people from these particular countries support terrorism either directly or indirectly. According to Westgate (95), in the past, cases have emerged whereby terrorists go through the borders purporting to be refugees. As long as the terrorist groups have people in the American soil, it becomes easier for more terrorists to cross the borders. Those that manage to cross over identify the major border security loopholes which they use to bring in more of their members. Moreover, some of the refugees who manage to pass the borders legally, offer their support to the terrorist groups by hosting their members. On the same note, there is the risk of such Muslim fundamentalists indoctrinating other refugees or even the Native Americans. Bayer & Matthes (848) state that the Bureau of Justice Statistics report, published in 2015 indicate that in the previous year, there were 1.56 million convicts in both state and federal correction facilities. Amazingly, about a quarter of these prisoners were immigrants. This is a clear indication of what immigrants are capable of. Therefore, the only way to contain such security threats is not only by beefing security checkpoints along the borders but also effecting bans on citizens of the seven countries. According to Hong (49), the US president Donald Trump and the Attorney General have always wanted to make the public hold unto the belief that the illegal immigrants are the major security threat to the US citizens. During his speech at the joint Congress session, he summoned the families of the victims of illegal immigrants and made a promise to create a ‘voice’. This office was tasked with compiling reports of victimization of undocumented immigrants who live in the USA. This was a clear indication of how Trump’s government struggles to get any possible avenue so that to pile the insecurity blames on the illegal immigrants. Immigration reforms as a subject has evoked a lot of emotion even amongst the Democrats. According to CNN, the illegal immigrants provide a great contribution to the economy of America. There are approximately 8.4 million illegal immigrants who are employed in the US. Surprisingly, the group constitutes about 5.2% of the country’s labor force. This is an increase from 3.8 back in the year 2000 (Gil et al 613). Westgate (88) attributes the increase to the rising number of refugees from some of the Asian countries in the past decade. In Texas for example, there is a likelihood of workforce decreasing by 6.3% if the undocumented population is not put into consideration. Subsequently, there would also be a decrease in the gross product by 2.1%. Besides, there are some segments of the American economy that are entirely dependent on the labor force of the immigrants. According to the US Department of Agriculture, about half of the workers who are hired in the American crop agriculture are illegal immigrants. Thus, the much acclaimed immigration reforms which are advocated for by the Republicans, are likely to have great impact on the US fruit and vegetable industries. Similarly, According to Hong (51) the other labor Department with the same echoing is the national Milk Producers Federation. According to James Host, the organization’s economist, in an interview with CNN firmly states that in case the illegal immigrants are deported, labor shortage could tremendously rise. Beyer & Matthes (857) point out that immigrants make a major tax contribution to the Federal Government. Actually, all the types of taxes which are generated by both legal and the illegal immigrants surpass the value of services they use. Therefore the allegation that the illegal immigrants signify an abuse of Americans’ sovereignty is debased. If anything, it would be illogical for a country as revered as America to employ its invaders. ConclusionThe idea of media inclination towards a particular political party is not a new phenomenon in both business and the political arena in the US. This is exemplified when a media channel systematically foregrounds some selected trending topics in such a way that contravenes the professional journalism standards. The cases of Fox media and the CNN have been evident in the public domain, reasons for such biasness varying from financial elevation to political stance of the executives in the organizations. Nonetheless, such predilection should be halted because news from these media channels do not give the public a clear picture of country’s situation.Works CitedBeyer, Audum, and Jorg Matthes. “Public perceptions of media coverage of irregular immigration: Comparative insights from France, the United States, and Norway.” America Behavioral Scientist 59.7 (2015):pp 839-857Gil de Zuniiga, Homero, Teresa Correa, and Sebastian Valenzuela. “Selective exposure to cable news and immigration in the US: The relationship between Fox News, CNN and attitude towards Mexican immigrants.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56.4 (2012): pp. 597-615Hong, Kari E. “The Ten Parts of “Illegal” in “Illegal Immigration” That I Do Not Understand.” UC Davis Law Review Online 50 (2017): pp 43-51.Westgate, Christopher Joseph. “One Language, One Nation, and One Vision.” Contemporary Latina/ o Media: Production, Circulation, Politics (2014): pp 82-98.