MOTHER, IMMIGRANT, CRIMINAL:
Newspaper Coverage and the Construction of Identity
in the Elvira Arellano Controversy
MADRE, INMIGRANTE, CRIMINAL:
Cobertura en los medios de comunicación y la construcción de identidad
en la controvesía de Elvira Arellano
Sara McElmurry
Centro de Idiomas
Universidad Tecnológica de la Mixteca
Abstract:
From August 2006 through August 2007, Elvira Arellano, an undocumented Mexican
immigrant, lived in a church on Chicago’s west side with her seven-year-old son, Saul,
himself a U.S. citizen, to avoid a deportation order. Her plight played out in Chicago-area
and national media, piggybacking on a nation-wide debate on immigration. Through
framing and critical discourse analyses, I examine how identities for Arellano are
constructed vis-à-vis news articles, opinion columns, editorials and letters to the editor
published in the Chicago Tribune and Hoy from August 7, 2006 through January 7, 2007.
While Arellano was deported on August 20, 2007, this study focuses on media coverage
during this five-month period.
Desde agosto del 2006 hasta agosto del 2007, Elvira Arellano, una inmigrante mexicana
indocumentada, vivía en una iglesa en el lado oeste de Chicago con Saúl, su hijo de siete
años, quién es ciudadano de los Estado Unidos, para evitar una orden de deportación. Su
historia se narró a tráves de los medios de comunicación en Chicago y el resto del país,
llevada a cuestas sobre un diálogo nacional sobre la inmigración. Utilizando dos tipos de
análisis lingüístico -- "framing" (encuadre) y "critical discourse" (discurso crítico) –
examino como las identidades de Arellano se construyen con respecto a los varios
artículos, columnas de opinión, columnas editoriales, y cartas al editor publicados en los
periódicos Chicago Tribune y Hoy entre el 7 de agosto del 2006 y el 7 de enero del 2007. A
pesar de que Arellano fue deportada el 20 de agosto del 2007, esta investigación se enfoca
en la cobertura de los medios de comunicación durante este periodo de cinco meses.
Elvira Arellano is an undocumented immigrant from Mexico who took up residence with
her U.S.-born son, Saul, in Adalberto United Methodist Church on Chicago’s west side in
an effort to defy a deportation order.
Arellano’s story “broke” both locally in Chicago and internationally in August 2006,
piggybacking on a nation-wide debate on immigration. Arellano served as the human face
of an increasingly abstract, polarized and partisan debate on the plight of the more than 12
million immigrants living in the United States illegally.
However, Arellano was no stranger to controversy. After being arrested in December 2002
for working at O’Hare Airport under a false Social Security number, she was served a
deportation order and subsequently granted three one-year extensions to care for her Saul,
who suffers from ADHD and other medical conditions, according to media reports.
However, at the end of her third extension, Arellano received a deportation order. As Saul’s
medical condition had improved, authorities claimed there was no justification for
additional extensions. Instead of reporting to officials on her deportation date, however,
Arellano took “sanctuary” in Adalberto United Methodist Church with permission from her
pastor, Rev. Walter Coleman, on August 15.
Arellano’s move to the church prompted a surge of media coverage. Her story became the
subject of around-the-clock coverage on both English- and Spanish-language television
around the country, internet blogs, and multilingual international newspapers. The impact
of the story is evidenced by the more than 70 stories published in the Chicago Tribune and
Hoy from August 7, 2006 through January 7, 2007. This study examines the various
identities constructed for Arellano vis-à-vis coverage in these two newspapers.
1. Literature Review
In analyzing the construction of identity for Arellano, it is critical to first understand that
news is a unique form of written communication. van Dijk (1998:4) describes news as
“news discourse” which includes both the notion of news in the physical sense – such as an
article in a newspaper – and news in an abstract sense – its content and meaning. Because
it is unique, the literature suggests that analyzing news discourse is perhaps best
accomplished through Fairclough’s (Titscher 2000, as cited in Richardson, 2006:37) threetiered approach to Critical Discourse Analysis (henceforth CDA), which describes news
discourse as “simultaneously text, discursive practice – which also includes the production
and interpretation of texts – and social practice.”
In Fairclough’s model, each of the three dimensions interacts with the others, prompting
Richardson (2006:37) to reflect on the cyclical nature of the creation and consumption of
discourse: “social practices influence texts, via shaping the context and mode in which they
are produced, and in turn texts help influence society via shaping the viewpoints of those
who read or otherwise consume them.” Fairclough’s three dimensions are briefly
summarized as follows:
1.1. Social Practices
2
The social dimension of Fairclough’s CDA model embodies the “the structures, the
institutions, and the values that, while residing outside of the newsroom, permeate and
structure the activities and outputs of journalism” (Richardson (2006:114).
One such social structure, the dominance of an “elite” class over the “popular” working
class, has significant, well-documented implications for media. Wayne (2003, as cited in
Richardson 2006) suggests that “the American working class constitute 60-70 percent of
the population, but that ‘they nowhere appear in the media in anything like this proportion”
(p. 137).
Based on the literature, I will define “elites” as those who hold positions of power, and
have arrived in those positions via education, money – or both. The term “popular,”
therefore, refers to everyone else – the working-class laborer, the immigrant and the poor.
Applying Fairclough’s model of CDA (via Titscher et al 2000), these social divisions affect
the production, and ultimately, the consumption, of news discourse.
It is important to note that journalists themselves are often considered among the elite
(Beck and Camarota 2002, Richardson 2006:137). Furthermore, van Dijk (2005:10)
maintains that “popular opinions are often preformulated by elites who have preferential
access to the media.” In other words, the opinions of the “popular” sector of the country are
influenced by what they are reading in the newspaper – the news discourse that has been
created by “elite” journalists.
The phenomena of invisibility or hypervisibility may contribute to the disconnect between
the elite and popular sectors. The working class is made invisible through the use of
phrasing that makes them non-persons, such as “janitors” or “maids” (Richardson
2006:137). Conversely, such dominated classes can be made hypervisible “through
foregrounding an assemblage of ‘social defects’” (Richardson 2006:139).
In other words, identity is constructed through language. According to Moon and Rolison
(1998, as cited in Richardson 2006:140), “what we call ourselves and others as well as how
these groups are described plays a role in establishing and maintaining hierarchical,
valenced relationships.” Moon and Rolison’s groups – ourselves and others – are
conceptualized according to “polarized” ideologies as notions of “Us” and “Them,” (van
Dijk 2000:95) where “our good actions [are pitted against] their bad ones” (p. 99).
1.2. Discursive Practices
Social influences on news discourse aside, the internal processes through which news is
created and consumed affect discourse as well. The link between newspaper audience –
actual, perceived and desired – and content has been discussed thoroughly in the literature
(Richardson 2006, Franklin 1997, Gramsci 1971, van Dijk 1998). Instead, the difference
between types of news discourse is central to the current analysis.
Greenberg (2000:517) suggests that the first type of discourse, “hard news,” is news that
“purports to be balanced and fair.” Fowler (1991:221) conversely describes “opinion”
discourse as “address[ing] newsreaders embraced in a consensual (‘us’) relationship, by
3
taking a particular stance in relation to the persons (‘them’) and topics referred to.”
Analyzing differences between these two types of news discourse may reveal a
newspaper’s aspirations to please its current – and desired – audience by pitting the
perceived “us” against “them.”
1.3. Textual Practices
The selection of language used in constructing news discourse is significant. Richardson
suggests, “in producing texts there is a range of choices to be made, and every text which
has been produced could have been produced differently” (2006:54). The literature suggests
that such choices fall into observable patterns, including syntax (Simpson 1993, as cited in
Richardson 2006:54), modality (Richardson 2006:59) rhetoric (van Dijk 2000:109,
Richardson 2006:69), hyperbole (van Dijk 2000:109). and presupposition (Tannen
1993:44), but most relevant to the current analysis are the semantic “moves” suggested by
van Dijk (2000:104-106).
Van Dijk maintains that these “moves” polarize “Us” and “Them” and include: (1)
overgeneralization, including the use of vague quantifiers such as “many;” (2) apparent
empathy, where seemingly positive feelings about a group are followed by a “but” and a
negative statement (p. 105-106); and (3) legalism, which is particularly relevant to
Arellano’s plight: “whatever happens, the law must be respected, including the rules and
regulations of immigration...this formulation also implies that when Others break those
laws, We can legitimately take action against Them” (p. 106).
Furthermore, a name itself may create an individual identity – positive or negative – for the
subject being described. Richardson (2006:49) explains that “journalists have to provide
names for the people in the events they report and this naming always involves choice.”
These choices, according to Pan and Kosicki (1993) often involve assigning “designators”
in establishing a “correspondence between a signifier and ‘signified’ as well as allocating
the signified in a specific cognitive category” (p. 62). Richardson (2006) argues that these
“designators” are key in constructing identity:
The way that people are named in news discourse can have significant impact on the
way in which they are viewed. We all simultaneously possess a range of identities,
roles and characteristics that could be used to describe us equally accurately but not
with the same meaning (p. 49, emphasis in original).
The difference in accuracy over meaning is significant. Richardson (2006:49) argues that
choices made in naming people can “include them within a category and exclude them from
other different categories – or perhaps, choose to foreground one social category over other
equally accurate alternatives.”
1.4. Framing Analysis
In addition to CDA, framing analysis, as proposed by Pan and Kosicki (1993), can aid in
identifying the effects that the construction of both group and individual identity have in
shaping public opinion and debate around issues such as immigration. Pan and Kosicki
argue that every story has a “theme” that serves as the central organizing idea, also defined
4
as “frame” in the literature (Tannen 1993:19-20). I adopt the latter term for the current
analysis.
Frames aid in our understanding of news discourse. According to Pan and Kosicki
(1993:55): “The basic idea is to view news texts as a system of organized signifying
elements that both indicate the advocacy of certain ideas and provide devices to encourage
certain kinds of audience processing of texts.” These “signifying elements” are Pan and
Kosicki’s previously-mentioned “designators” (p. 62), which may trigger individual
frames/schema/scripts in readers’ minds and gear their consumption of text in a certain
way.
Leech’s (1974:10) description of seven types of meaning supports the notion that
designators may “mean” above and beyond their cognitive meaning, the first of Leech’s
seven “types,” which he describes as the “denotative” or “cognitive” meaning of a word,
assumed to be the “central factor in linguistic communication” (p. 10). The present study
will focus on Leech’s connotative, affective, stylistic and thematic meanings, and how the
conceptual meanings of designators may trigger frames, and, by extension, the other
“meanings” of a word.
Framing analysis, therefore, will be adopted along with CDA in understanding how identity
is constructed both by and for Elvira Arellano story in Chicago print media.
2. Methodology
Based on the literature review, I use a multi-pronged approach to analyze media coverage
of the Arellano story. First, I identify the various “designators” used to construct an identity
for Arellano and employ a frequency count of the number of times that each is used in both
newspapers. Next, I employ CDA to link designators with Fairclough’s social, discursive
and textual practices. Finally, via framing analysis, I look at how individual “designators”
used to describe Elvira Arellano may trigger certain “frames” that aid readers in
constructing the meaning of the given news discourse.
2.1. Definitions and Rationale
For the framing analysis, a “designator” is defined as a journalist’s or letter/editorial/
opinion writer’s direct description of Arellano. The designator will be a Noun Phrase
(hereafter NP) that refers to Arellano directly and functions within a sentence as a subject,
subject complement or as an NP within a clause that further describes Arellano.
In an effort to draw conclusions about “elite” and “popular” opinions of Arellano, hard
news and opinion pieces are correlated with “elite” perspectives, while letters to the editor
are equated with “popular” opinion.
2.2. Newspapers Included in Analysis
5
The media included in the sample, the Chicago Tribune and Hoy, are owned by the same
parent company, the Chicago-based Tribune Company1; however, their audiences are quite
different:
•
The 150-year-old broadsheet Chicago Tribune (hereafter Tribune) reaches an older,
more affluent audience than other newspapers in Chicago. With a daily readership2 of
almost 2.8 million, the newspaper is read by 39 percent of people living in the Metro
Chicago market, or 42 percent of all males and 37 percent of all females. Of these
readers, a full 81 percent are 35 years old to 55-plus, 97 percent have a household
income of $75,000 or more, and 54 percent are college graduates. Just over 41 percent
own their own home and 38 percent have children in their household. (Chicago Tribune
2006).
•
Hoy is Chicago’s only Spanish-language daily, launched in September 2003 and is
distributed for free to 483,000 readers each week via street-side boxes and a growing
home delivery service (Hoy 2006). Hoy readers are 56 percent male, with an average
household income of $38, 446. Sixty-three percent of readers are between 18 and 34
years old. Forty-six percent of readers have achieved at least a high school education,
77 percent are employed, 31 percent own their home, with 74 percent having children in
their household (the average household size is 4.6 people). In terms of language, 65
percent of Hoy readers are Spanish-dominant, and 16 percent are bilingual (Sandoval
2007). The Tribune also publishes editions of Hoy in New York and Los Angeles.
By virtue of demographic variables, more Tribune readers are members of “the elite” and
more Hoy readers may be considered members of “the popular.” For the purposes of this
study, however, readers of both newspapers will be coded as “popular,” as will be
discussed in the results section.
2.3. News Discourse Sample
I read and clipped all locally-written news discourse items (N=76) related to the Arellano
story from both the Tribune and Hoy. Each NP designator occurring in each clip was
identified and coded according to its use within the categories listed in Table 1.
The sample3 includes five months of coverage, from the period August 7, 2006 to January
7, 2007. Of note is that Hoy does not publish letters to the editor, but popular opinion and
1
As they are owned by the same parent company, the Chicago Tribune and Hoy frequently share content.
However, in the case of data related to the Arellano story, only one instance of shared content was observed.
In all other cases, the content of each newspaper reflected the work of separate journalists and is
demonstrative of each newspaper’s unique perspective on the issue and of each newspaper's target/perceived
audience.
2
Newspaper and audience demographics are taken from weekday “cume” statistics (they describe someone
who has read at least 1 of the past 5 daily issues of the newspaper); numbers for the Sunday edition of the
Tribune differ slightly.
3
According to Richardson (2006:106-107), “news agency reports,” or copy taken from a wire source such as
the Associated Press or Reuters and published in a newspaper, are often edited in accordance with the specific
stylistic guidelines of a newspaper. Therefore, he argues that editing variations in wire copy offer an
opportunity to further analyze a link between newspaper audience and content. However, because I found
6
designators were gathered through direct and reported speech from popular sources cited in
“hard” news.
2.4. Research Questions
I apply the results of the frequency count, CDA and framing analysis to the following
research question:
•
Do general patterns suggest that the Tribune and Hoy position Arellano differently?
Do these patterns correlate to differences in (perceived and/or actual) newspaper
audience?
A secondary goal of the analysis is to draw conclusions about the way that “elite” and
“popular” audiences view Arellano’s plight, and, more generally, the issue of immigration
in the United States.
3. Results
From the 76 articles clipped from the Tribune and Hoy, a total of 693 designators were
coded for Arellano. Overall distribution of designators for each news discourse category is
reflected in Table 2. Because of space restrictions, results from the frequency count are
briefly discussed and summarized in graph form (Figures 1-4) to allow for a more thorough
discussion of CDA. Framing analysis is discussed vis-à-vis overall patterns in the
conclusions section.
3.1. Frequency Count
Because of the number of designators identified in certain categories, similar designators
were grouped to allow for analysis and observation of patterns. I define the general groups
of designators as “matrix” designators.
For the purposes of analysis, designators occurring within the categories of “Reporter,”
“Editorial Board/Columnist,” “Elite ‘Other’ – Direct Speech,” and “Elite ‘Other’ –
Reported Speech” categories are considered part of “elite” discourse. Conversely,
designators occurring in the “Popular – Direct Speech” and “Popular-Reported Speech”
categories are considered part of “popular” discourse. In both the Tribune and Hoy, data for
direct and reported speech discourse categories was limited and will not be considered as
part of the current analysis.
In any given category, the most common designator was a variation of the name Elvira
Arellano (e.g. “Arellano,” “Elvira Arellano,” or “Elvira”). While the use of a name is
powerful in the construction of identity (see Brown and Ford 1964), its discussion goes
beyond the scope of the current article. Instead, other salient matrix designators for each
news discourse category are analyzed.
•
Tribune Designators from “Elite” Categories
little basis for comparison among wire stories published in the sampled newspapers, “hard” news stories not
written explicitly by local newspaper staff are not be included in the sample of this study.
7
The distribution of matrix designators is illustrated in Figure 1. In line with van Dijk’s
(2005) “Us” versus “Them,” the use of “immigrant” as a matrix designator reveals a
distancing tendency. Specific designators included “illegal immigrant,” “illegal immigrant
from Mexico,” “foreign national,” “citizen of Mexico,” and even “picked-upon illegal
immigrant” – all identities that few Tribune readers can personally relate to, given reader
demographics.
The designator “activist” is at time used alone in an NP to identify Arellano, but is also
often part of a larger NP, where Arellano is positioned as an activist for immigrants,
thereby distancing her from those who are not immigrants, in designators such as
“immigrant advocate,” “activist for Illinois’ illegal immigrants,” and “vocal advocate for
illegal immigrants.”
“Mother,” used as a matrix designator for16 percent for the category, may be considered
both humanizing and distancing. While it may foster identification with Arellano on a panhuman level, “mother” also distances as it describes Arellano in terms of another person,
e.g. “his mother,” “anonymous single mother,” and “a mother.” In this sense, Arellano is
being defined through an “Other” – her son, Saul.
•
Tribune Designators from “Popular” Categories
As seen in Figure 2, “criminal” was the most common matrix designator for popular
discourse in the same newspaper. A full 39 percent of designators fell under the “criminal”
heading, including the distancing and dehumanizing “illegal alien mother,” along with
“illegal immigrant,” “‘alleged’ criminal” (quotation marks from original), “lawbreaker,”
and “violator.”
The matrix designators “mother” and “symbol” both comprised 23 percent of designators.
Even within these frames, the “criminal” designator is salient. Arellano is identified as an
“illegal alien mother,” and “hardly a poster child for immigration reform [because she
broke the law]” in letters to the editor submitted by Tribune readers.
•
Hoy Designators from “Elite” Categories
Whereas the use of “mother” was distancing in news discourse from Tribune elites, it is
used as a sign of solidarity in Hoy. Here, Arellano is also described in terms of Saul (using
the possessive pronoun “su”4), but still has validity on her own in designations such as “su
madre, una activista e inmigrante indocumentada5,” “la madre mexicana6,” “madre
trabajadora7,” and “el amor de una madre por su hijo.8” Figure 3 illustrates the use of the
“mother” matrix designator, among others.
As it was for elite discourse from the Tribune, “activist” is commonly used as a matrix
designator in Hoy elite discourse. However, Tribune elites used this designator to position
4
his
his mother, an activist and undocumented immigrant
6
the Mexican mother
7
working mother
8
the love of a mother for her child
5
8
Arellano as an advocate for a criminal act; conversely, in Hoy, Arellano is identified as an
advocate for a social cause: “la activista pro immigrante9,” and, by extension, a symbol of a
cause: “símbolo de la lucha por una reforma migratoria en Chicago10.” “rostro de la lucha
de todos los inmigrantes y sus causas11,” and “dirigente al movimiento a favor de todos los
inmigrantes12.”
Also of note is Hoy elites’ tendency to define “symbol” in very human terms – as a part of
the body, most notably “face:” “la cara fresca de un problema viejo13,” “la cara por los 12
milones de indocumentados14,” “rostro al problema de milones de familias con hijos
ciudadanos15.” Tribune elites tended to use the more abstract term “symbol.”
Whereas Tribune designators included accusations of criminal and illegal activity, Arellano
is never accused outright of wrongdoing in Hoy designators. A common designator is
“considerada fugitiva (por el Departamento de Inmigración y Aduanas)16.” The word
“illegal” never appeared as a designator in Hoy; Arellano’s immigration status, referred to
as “illegal” in Tribune clips, becomes “indocumentada17” in Hoy.
The distinction between “illegal” and “indocumentada” is indicative of an overall
difference in tone between the two newspapers. Referring to Leech’s (1974) seven types of
meaning, a simple comparison between the conceptual meanings of the two terms reveals a
significant difference: the conceptual meaning of “undocumented” is “lacking
documentation or authentication” (“Undocumented,” dictionary.com, n.d.); for “illegal,” it
is “forbidden by law or statute” (“Illegal,” dictionary.com, n.d.). In terms of connotative
meaning, therefore, “illegal” communicates a sense of “forbidden” criminal activity of
which Arellano is “guilty.” This sense of law, criminality and guilt is lacking in the
meaning of “undocumented.”
•
Hoy Designators from “Popular” Categories
The matrix designator “mother” manifested itself again in popular news discourse for Hoy,
with designators including “madre trabajadora18” comprising 37 percent of the designators,
as illustrated in Figure 4.
3.2. Critical Discourse Analysis
The patterns of designator use uncovered through framing analysis are perhaps best
understood when demonstrated through the actual news discourse taken from the sample.
Because of space restrictions, observations from the two most relevant of Fairclough’s
three dimensions – social and textual practices – will be highlighted here.
9
pro-immigration activist
symbol of the fight for immigration reform in Chicago
11
face of the fight of all immigrants and their causes
12
leader of the movement in favor of immigrants
13
fresh face to an old problem
14
the face of 12 million undocumented [immigrants]
15
the face of the problem of millions of families with children who are citizens
16
considered a fugitive by the Department of Immigration and Customs
17
undocumented
18
working mother
10
9
Social Observations
Reinforcing Richardson’s (2006) notions of “invisibility” and “hypervisibility,” the
following copy is taken from an August 9 Tribune article: “The outcry comes for a woman
who was an anonymous single mother working as a cleaner when immigration officials
arrested her in 2002.”
Arellano is made invisible through the “anonymous single mother” and “cleaner”
designators. Conversely, Arellano’s standing as president of United Latino Family, an
Chicago-based community organization she helped to found, and a title that could lend her
credibility as an “elite” source in the media is rarely mentioned. The Tribune references the
organization only three times – and each time, the reference is buried in the lower
paragraphs of a multiple-paragraph story. Instead, the Tribune most frequently designates
Arellano as “criminal” and “immigrant,” which lends to her invisibility, despite the fact that
she is at the center of an ongoing media story.
Hoy makes reference to her status as founder and/or president of the organization five
times. This designator, coupled with the use of designators such as “gran líder19,” along
with “mujer fenomenal20” and “personaje que importa21” lends her power and brings her
positive characteristics to the foreground.
Furthermore, van Dijk’s “Us” versus “Them” phenomenon (2000:95) manifests itself in the
following excerpt from a letter to the editor, published in the Tribune in response to the
question, “Should Elvira Arellano be deported or allowed to stay in the U.S?” on August
18:
Elvira Arellano is symptomatic of what is wrong with our country now. She takes a
job illegally, driving down the value of labor of workers who are here legally. Her
son takes up a space in our school system, and burdens our health system. Yes I
know he is a citizen, but his only tenuous link to our country is the fact that his
illegal alien mother gave birth on our soil. She’s a criminal; the government
shouldn’t fret about how her arrest and deportation will look (my emphasis).
Arellano is equated with “them,” an outside group that is somehow inferior to “us,” a
concept which takes various forms, including the United States, and U.S. citizens. In line
with the Tribune’s use of designators including “criminal,” and “immigrant,” she is
distanced as a member of an out-group.
A critical observation in Fariclough’s social dimension is how Arellano is simultaneously
made hypervisible and invisible, one of “Us” and then one of “Them,” by describing her
vis-à-vis her son, Saul. Throughout the five-month period of analysis, the focus of the news
discourse sampled shifted from Elvira to Saul Arellano, who increasingly became the
center of media controversy as he began to travel in the United States and Mexico to lobby
19
great leader
“Phenomenal Woman”
21
“Person Who Mattered”
20
10
on his mother’s behalf. In the news discourse, Saul was either positioned as a “regular”
seven-year-old in the care of his mother, or as a scared young boy who was thrust into the
limelight by Elvira Arellano and her handlers.
A September 9 Hoy “hard” news article constructs at “good mother” identity for Elvira
Arellano:
Al regresar a casa, su madre lo esperaba con comida recién preparada en el
apartamento del segundo pisto, justo arriba de la iglesia, donde ahora es su nuevo
hogar. “Estaré con él siempre, para ayudarle con sus tareas y procurando que se
gradué y logré su sueño de ser bombero,” comentó la madre mexicana22 (my
emphasis).
The quote is not attributed to “Arellano,” but instead to “the Mexican mother,” a designator
that sets Arellano apart from other mothers. The role of a “Mexican mother” is cited in
other instances. On September 4, Hoy published an article titled “Padres defienden a Elvira
Arellano23” in response criticism from Arellano’s detractors, with a quote from the
executive director of Chicago’s Casa Aztlán community organization citing her as a good
example of the protective role of “Mexican mothers:”
No vamos a permitir que duden de la integridad de Elvira como madre. Es una
digna representante del papel que desempeñan las madres mexicanas que protegen a
sus hijos por encima de todo.24
An October 4 Tribune column, “As boy heads to D.C., mother keeps the faith,” however,
seems to indicate that, the parenting skills of Arellano aside, Saul is decidedly different
from other children his age:
It’s a strange life for a kid, this celebrity and insecurity. But Saul’s life hasn’t been
normal since 2002 when his mother, deported once before, was arrested for working
at O’Hare with a false Social Security number and ordered out of the U.S.
The column’s suggestion that his mother’s arrest has lead to Saul’s “strange” childhood
reinforces overall Tribune views Saul as being adversely affected by his mother and her
supporters. Other news discourse extends the notion of Saul as “different” by pitting images
of his seemingly “normal” childhood against the responsibility he is expected to bear on
behalf of his mother. The juxtaposition of toys at a rally September 8 Tribune article
suggests that Saul is a kid in an adult’s role:
For now, Arellano’s hopes rest on Saul, who had already taken center stage at
22
Coming home from school, his mother was waiting for him with recently-prepared food in the second floor
apartment, just above the church, that now is their new home. “I will be with him always, to help him with his
homework and make sure that he graduates and fulfills his dreams to become a fireman,” said the Mexican
mother.
23
Parents defend Elvira Arellano
24
We are not going to permit them to doubt Elvira’s integrity as a mother. She is a good example of the role
that Mexican mothers play in protecting their children, above everything else.
11
sympathetic rallies, quietly playing with a Spiderman action figure or a TV
microphone cord.
Others cite the negative effect that the spotlight is having on Saul, using the rhetorical
strategies of hyperbole cited by van Dijk (2000:109). In this sample, photographers do not
simply take pictures; rather, “flashbulbs exploded.” Saul does not simply “run” to the next
room; instead, he “scurries:”
For Saul, the trip has at times been too much. Flashbulbs exploded as he entered the
Mexican congressional chambers. Saul scurried into another room and hid under a
table. (Tribune, November 15, my emphasis)
Even the editors of Hoy, who had previously defended Arellano’s role as a “Mexican
mother,” employ van Dijk’s semantic “move” of apparent empathy (2000:106) in calling
for the protection of Saul from the media spotlight in a September 21 opinion piece:
Es obvio que Saúl es fuerte, que ama a su madre y que desea permanecer con ella.
Pero Elvira debe estar alerta y evitar que su hijo sea manipulado y se aprovechen de
él.25
In this case, however, through a passive construction, the blame is taken away from Elvira
Arellano and placed on “Others.”
Textual Observations
van Dijk’s “semantic moves” (2000:104-106), which he maintained work to polarize “Us”
and “Them,” are evident throughout the news discourse sample.
Overgeneralization is evident in an August 18 Tribune letter to the editor where the writer
speculates that “There are probably thousands, if not millions, of cases just like this
[Arellano’s] in this country,” as justification for not making an exception for Arellano. Hoy,
on the other hand, uses very exact figures to describe immigration: Arellano was frequently
quoted as saying that she was working on behalf of the “12 millones de indocumentados.26”
In terms of apparent empathy, responses to the aforementioned Tribune poll reveal readers’
attempts to express solidarity with Arellano’s plight, but employ apparent empathy to state
their opinion that she should be deported:
Yes, separation from a child is difficult and sad, but it appears there is nothing
stopping her from taking her son to Mexico with her.
While I do not know Elvira Arellano, I will concede the obvious that she is
probably a decent, hardworking person and a loving, caring mother who wants to
provide a better life for her and her son. For that I can sympathize with her plight
25
It is obvious that Saul is strong, that he loves his mother and that he wants to stay with her. But Elvira
should be alert and keep Saul from being manipulated and taken advantage of.
26
12 million undocumented [immigrants]
12
But I cannot sympathize with her and the millions of other illegal immigrants in this
country who came here knowingly breaking our laws and now demand that these
laws be set aside just for them.
Finally, on August 17, the Tribune ran an editorial that employed a legalism in the first
paragraph: “Elvira Arellano came to this country from Mexico seeking a better life, but she
came here illegally.” The following day, August 18, a Tribune “popular” source also
employed legalism, this time via letter to the editor: “It is time this country enforces its
existing laws. […] I am a citizen of this country and if I break the law, there is a penalty I
must pay.”
The frequent use of legalism by “popular” Tribune sources is evident in identifying
Arellano as a “criminal” in 38 percent of designators used (see Figure 2). However,
legalism was not as relevant among elite or popular contributors in Hoy, with “criminal”
representing only eight percent of all designators used in each sample.
4. Conclusions
In this section, I will attempt to reconcile the various patterns discussed in the frequency
count and critical discourse analyses above, to answer the research question posed at the
end of the methodology section.
Differences in the identities constructed for Arellano by the two newspapers are numerous.
For the purposes of succinctly demonstrating these contrasts and how they correlate with
each newspapers’ audience, discussion will draw on findings from the framing and
discourse analyses to focus on three identity “frames” (Tannen 1983) constructed for
Arellano in both newspapers: “mother,” “immigrant,” and “criminal.” Of interest is how
each newspaper constructs a different identity for Arellano while making use of what Leech
(1974: n. pag.) would consider to be “conceptually” similar frames.27
“Mother” Frame
As discussed previously, overall news discourse in Hoy was inclusive, positioning Arellano
as a member of the “in-group.” The matrix designator “mother” was the most frequently
used by both “elite” and “popular” contributors for Hoy, making Arellano seem relatable,
like one of “Us,” to a readership where 74 percent have children.
Critical discourse analysis also revealed a very salient “mother” frame in Hoy: numerous
stories highlighted Arellano as an attentive mother – getting Saul ready for his first day of
school, preparing an after-school snack for him, helping him reach his goal of someday
becoming a fireman. Through these stories of Arellano as an attentive caregiver to Saul,
Hoy’s focus remained on Arellano herself.
Conversely, while “mother” was a frequently used frame for Arellano in the Tribune, it was
used to construct a very different identity for Arellano from that in Hoy. As a designator,
“mother” is used in a distancing manner – “anonymous single mother” and “illegal alien
27
The designator “mother” has different connotative meanings in the Tribune and Hoy, as do the designators
“illegal” and “undocumented,” as previously discussed.
13
mother” are excellent examples of how an identity for Arellano is constructed to separate
her from “Us,” including any of the few (38 percent28) Tribune readers who may be parents
themselves. Furthermore, instead of being identified as the son of his mother, as he was in
Hoy, Saul was identified as a victim of his mother in the Tribune.
We may conclude that the “mother” frame is used in Hoy to endear Arellano to readers: she
is just like “Us,” and shares “our” cultural value of motherhood above everything else.
Inversely, in the Tribune, the same frame distances her from readers. She is a “bad” mother,
one that exploits her child. The negative “mother” frames make Arellano’s flaws
hypervisible and place her in an out-group with “Them.”
“Immigrant” Frame
The designator “immigrant” was the most frequently used by Tribune “elites,” a trend that
correlated with the findings of CDA. As an immigrant, Arellano is different from “Us”
Tribune readers – she works illegally, uses resources intended for our country’s citizens,
and is one of “millions” of other immigrants in the same situation. In line with the latter,
she is often identified as a symbol or as an activist, but one that is working in favor of
illegal activity: she is an “activist for Illinois’ illegal immigrants,” and a “symbol for the
state’s 40,000 illegal immigrants.”
In Hoy, inversely, Arellano is rarely identified solely as an “immigrant.” Instead, she is the
“human face” of the immigrant movement: “símbolo de la lucha por una reforma
migratoria en Chicago29” and “rostro de la lucha de todos los inmigrantes y sus causas.30”
Again, Hoy has identified Arellano in terms that its readers can relate to: an immigrant, just
like “Us,” who is fighting on “our” behalf.
As was the case with the “mother” frame, varying uses of the “immigrant” frame in each
newspaper are used to align readers’ understanding of the discourse – and their
understanding of who Arellano is – with the way they might position/view themselves. In
the case of Hoy, Arellano is a member of the “in-group” of readers. Inversely, she is
identified as an “outsider” among Tribune readers – an “outsider” who, through her
continued representation of a cause that is not “ours,” is not making any attempts to become
more like “Us.”
“Criminal” Frame
“Criminal” was the most frequently-used designator in popular discourse in the Tribune,
and the newspaper’s coverage is rich in legalisms which construct a “criminal” frame for
Arellano31. Arellano’s criminal activity – the use of a false Social Security number and
illegal entry into the United States – serve as justification for “Us” to distance ourselves
from her and those like her.
28
The percentage of parents who have children in their households is lower (22 percent) when correlated with
the “average” issue of the Tribune, meaning that they read the newspaper everyday, as opposed to at least
once per work week.
29
Symbol of the fight for immigration reform in Chicago
30
face of the fight of all immigrants and their causes
31
The use of “criminal” as a designator can be largely attributed to “popular” discourse found within the
Tribune, which will be addressed in section 5.2
14
As discussed, Arellano’s status as an “illegal” immigrant in the Tribune becomes a
reference to her as an “undocumented” immigrant in Hoy. Whereas Arellano is identified as
a “criminal” in the Tribune, she is never overtly accused of any wrongdoing in Hoy.
Instead, the Department of Immigration becomes the agent in accusing her of illegal
activity. A common designator in coverage is “considerada fugitiva por el Departamento de
Inimgración y Aduanas32.
In light of the patterns I observed with each newspaper’s use of “illegal” versus
“undocumented” to refer to Arellano,33 I asked Tribune and Hoy reporters about the use of
the terms. Tribune Foreign Correspondent Oscar Avila explained that he viewed “illegal
immigrant” as the “neutral term.” Conversely, “undocumented immigrant” would be the
term used by Arellano’s proponents, and “illegal alien” would be used by her detractors.
According to Avila, as a matter of policy, the Tribune does not employ the latter term in
news discourse produced by a reporter; instead, it should appear only as part of a quote
(Avila 2007).
Leticia Espinosa, reporter for Hoy, (2007), however, described the opposite scenario: when
writing in a “manera general34,” Espinosa uses the term “indocumentada35,” per style
guidelines used by Hoy newspapers in Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. The term
“ilegal36” is used only as part of a quote.
Applying each reporter’s comments to the varying use of “illegal” versus “undocumented”
in each newspaper, we may conclude that the Tribune is attempting to identify Arellano
“neutrally” (though the “neutral” term is actually quite polarizing). Conversely, Hoy, as a
matter of editorial policy, employs the term “undocumented,” which connotes a lack of
criminal activity on Arellano’s part. Hoy’s use of the less-legalistic term may facilitate
readers’- a large percentage of whom are Mexican immigrants themselves – identification
with Arellano.
In sum, based on patterns found in the way Arellano is identified vis-à-vis the three frames
discussed above – mother, immigrant and criminal – we observe a somewhat
favorable/supportive tone in Hoy discourse, contrasted with a neutral/detached tone in
Tribune discourse. These patterns correlate with differences in the audience for each
newspaper: by virtue of their demographics, Hoy readers are more likely to identify with
Arellano, and the identity constructed for her in that newspapers’ discourse facilitates the
construction of an “in-group.” Conversely, Tribune readers – dramatically different
demographically than Hoy readers and, by extension, Arellano herself – may benefit from
the detached nature of Tribune coverage of the issue, thus facilitating the construction of
Arellano’s identity as one of “Them.”
32
considered a fugitive by the Department of Immigration and Customs
See Section 4.1.1 for a discussion of the meaning of the two terms.
34
generally
35
undocumented
36
illegal
33
15
A secondary goal of analysis was to draw conclusions about the way that “elite” and
“popular” audiences view Arellano’s plight, and, more generally, the issue of immigration
in the United States. A simple comparison of designators frequently used by “elite” and
“popular” groups in the Tribune reveals that “elites” used the matrix designators
“immigrant,” “activist,” and “mother” most frequently. At times, these designators were
used in a “criminal” frame (e.g. “illegal immigrant” and “activist for Illinois’ illegal
immigrants”), but there were also cases where they were used to convey sympathy or
support for Arellano, especially by Tribune columnists (e.g. “picked-upon illegal
immigrant” and “attentive mother”).
Conversely, “popular” sources in the Tribune used “criminal” nearly 40 percent of the time,
followed by “mother” and “symbol.” The focus on illegal activity is a theme in the data.
While “symbol” and “mother” were commonly used matrix designators in “popular”
discourse, analyzing individual designators from letters to the editor reveals further use of a
“criminal” frame: Arellano is an “illegal alien mother,” who is “symptomatic of what is
wrong with our country.” Via the “symbol” designator, Arellano is equated with all other
immigrants.
CDA also revealed a particularly strong “Us” versus “Them” frame in letters to the editor
submitted by “popular” sources in the Tribune. The designators used in letters to the editor
are similar to those used in other “popular” discourse, including direct quotes and reported
speech from “popular” sources. Analyzing all incidents of reported speech from public
sources in the Tribune, the most-used matrix designators corresponded to a “criminal”
frame: “lawbreaker,” “criminal” and “violator.” In conclusion, initial analysis reveals a
divide between Tribune “elite” and “popular” segments.
Though Hoy does not publish letters to the editor, data from other “popular” sources (e.g
direct and indirect quotes) was analyzed. Both elites and popular sources in Hoy were
largely steadfast in their support for Elvira Arellano, as evidenced by the inclusive identity
of “mother” that they constructed for her.
I hypothesize that opinion surrounding Arellano specifically may serve as a barometer to
gauge opinion for the issue of immigration in general. It is polarizing to a “wider” audience
– the “wide” audience served by the Tribune (39 percent of people living in the Metro
Chicago market). However, it does not have the same divisive effects within the Hispanic
community itself – especially one that, based on Hoy data that indicates a strong Spanishlanguage dominance among its readers, is comprised of fairly new immigrants and those
that live in immigrant enclaves.
TABLES & FIGURES
Discourse Category
Table 1: Discourse Categories
Explanation
Notes on Elite/Popular
Discourse
16
1. Direct Speech
2. Reported Speech
Includes designators found in
direct quotes from Arellano;
signaled by use of quotation
marks.
Includes designators found in
journalists’ paraphrase of direct
quotes from Arellano; signaled
by lack of quotation marks.
3.Reporter
Includes designators found in
copy written by journalist in
news story or article; signaled
by byline with reporter’s name.
4.Editorial Board/Columnist
Includes designators found in
copy written by a newspaper
editorial board or opinion
columnist; the former is
signaled by the newspaper
masthead, latter signaled by
columnist name and photo.
Includes designators found in
direct quotes from sources
attributed with titles of
authority (e.g. academics,
immigration authorities,
politicians).
Includes designators found in
journalists’ paraphrase of direct
quotes from sources attributed
with titles of authority.
5.Elite “Other” Direct
Speech
6.Elite “Other” Reported
Speech
7.Popular Direct Speech
8.Popular Reported Speech
Includes designators found in
direct quotes from sources
without titles of authority (e.g.
church passerby, friends and
family of Arellano), along with
news discourse found in letters
to the editor.
Includes designators found in
journalists’ interpretation of
direct quotes from sources
without titles of authority.
Table 2: Distribution of Designators
Discourse Category
1. Direct Speech
Tribune
N=7
Designators indicate Arellano
constructs her own identity.
Designators indicate how
Arellano may construct her own
identy, but may be colored by
journalists’ own (elite) bias
(Vivian 1999).
Copy purports to be “balanced
and fair” (Greenberg 2000).
However, as journalist is “elite”
(Beck and Camarota 2002),
analyzed as “elite” discourse.
Copy explicitly opinionated;
does not purport to be neutral.
Addresses “newsreaders
embraced in a consensual (‘us’)
relationship” (Fowler 1991).
Analyzed as “elite” discourse.
Analyzed as “elite” discourse
(Beck and Camarota 2002).
Also analyzed as “elite”
discourse, per Beck and
Camarota (2002), with
understanding that designators
may be colored by journalists’
bias.
Analyzed as “popular” discourse
(Beck and Camarota 2002)
Analyzed as “popular” discourse
(Beck and Camarota 2002).
Hoy
N=5
17
2. Reported Speech
3. Reporter
4. Editorial Board/Columnist
N=4
N=124
N=88
N=2
N=265
N=77
5. Elite “Other” Direct Speech
N=25
N=42
6. Elite “Other” Reported Speech
N=7
N=10
7. Popular Direct Speech
8. Popular Reported Speech
N=16
N=7
N=14
N=8
Figure 1: Tribune “Elite” Designators – Elvira Arellano
6%
8%
Immigrant
Activist
Mother
Criminal
Symbol
Anonymous
36%
4%
16%
Other
26%
18
Figure 2: Tribune “Popular” Designators – Elvira Arellano
8%
23%
8%
Symbol
Mother
Criminal
Worker
23%
38%
Anonymous
Figure 3: Hoy “Elite” Designators – Elvira Arellano
13%
5%
0%
Symbol
Mother
9%
30%
Activist
Criminal
Mexican
11%
Immigrant
Worker
9%
Other
19
Figure 4: Hoy “Popular” Designators – Elvira Arellano
9%
Worker
36%
Mother
Criminal
37%
Anonymous
Other
9%
9%
20
WORKS CITED
Avila, Oscar (2007). (Foreign Correspondent, Chicago Tribune). Phone interview. Chicago,
Illinois. February 21, 2007.
Beck, Roy and Camarota, Steven A. (2002). “Elite vs. Public Opinion: An Examination of
Divergent Views on Immigration.” Center for Immigration Studies. Accessed August 11,
2006. Online: www.cis.org/articles/2002/back1402.html
Chicago Tribune. (2006). “Advertiser Website.” Accessed October 22, 2006. Online:
http://classified.tribune.com/ctadvertiserwebsite/newspaper.htm
Espinosa, Leticia (2007). (Reporter, Hoy). Phone interview. Chicago, Illinois. March 11,
2007.
Fairclough, Norman. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language.
Harlow, England: Longman Group Limited.
Fairclough, Norman. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research.
New York: Routledge.
Fowler, Roger. (1991). Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. New
York: Routledge.
Franklin, B. (1997). Newzak and the News Media. London: Arnold, as referenced in
Richardson, John E. (2006). Analysing Newspapers: An Approach From Critical Discourse
Analysis. New York: Palgrave.
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. (Q. Hoare & G. Smith, Trans.).
New York: International Publishers, as referenced in Greenberg, Joshua. (2000). “Opinion
Discourse and Canadian Newspapers: The Case of the Chinese ‘Boat People.’” Canadian
Journal of Communication. Vol. 25. pp. 517-537.
Greenberg, Joshua. (2000). “Opinion Discourse and Canadian Newspapers: The Case of the
Chinese ‘Boat People.’” Canadian Journal of Communication. Vol. 25. pp. 517-537.
Greenberg, Joshua. (2002). “Framing and temporality in political cartoons: a critical
analysis of visual news discourse.” The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology.
May 2002, Vol. 39, Issue 2, page 181 – 199. Accessed August 11, 2006. Online:
http://faculty.millikin.edu/~moconner/in151h/cartoon2.html
Hoy. (2006). “Your Partner in Reaching the Hispanic Market.” Accessed October 22, 2006.
Online: http://www.hoyinternet.com/media/acrobat/2006-07/24556164.pdf
Illegal. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Accessed 10 March 2007. Online:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/illegal
21
Leech, Geoffrey (1974). Semantics. Middlesex, England: Penguin.
Moon, D.G. and Rolison, G.L. (1998). “Communication of classism,” in M.L. Hect (ed).
Communicating Prejudice, pp. 122-135. Thousand Oaks: Sage, as referenced in
Richardson, John E. (2006). Analysing Newspapers: An Approach From Critical Discourse
Analysis. New York: Palgrave.
Pan, Zhongdang and Gerald M. Kosicki. (1993). “Framing Analysis: An Approach to News
Discourse.” Political Communication. Vol. 10, pp. 55-75.
Richardson, John E. (2006). Analysing Newspapers: An Approach From Critical Discourse
Analysis. New York: Palgrave.
Sandoval, Salvador (2007). (Marketing Director, Hoy). Email communication. February 19,
2007.
Simpson, P. (1993). Language, Ideology and Point of View. London & New York:
Routledge, as referenced in Richardson, John E. (2006). Analysing Newspapers: An
Approach From Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Palgrave.
Tannen, Deborah (Ed.) (1993). Framing in Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Titsher, S., Meyer, M., Wodak, R., and Vetter, E. (2000) Methods of Text and Discourse
Analysis. London: Sage, as referenced in Richardson, John E. (2006). Analysing
Newspapers: An Approach From Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Palgrave.
Undocumented. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Accessed March 10, 2007.
Online: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/undocumented
van Dijk, Teun A. (1988). News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van Dijk, Teun A. (2000) “Ideologies, Racism, Discourse: Debates on Immigration and
Ethnic Issues.” In Jessika ter Wal & Maykel Verkuyten (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives
on Racism. (pp. 91-116). Aldershot etc. Ashgate. Online: http://www.discourses.org
van Dijk, Teun A. (2005). Racism and Discourse in Spain and Latin America. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wayne, M. (2003). Marxism and media Studies: Key Concepts and Contemporary Trends.
London: Pluto Press, as referenced in Richardson, John E. (2006). Analysing Newspapers:
An Approach From Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Palgrave.
22