Zealous Toward Social Harmony

Analysis of “A Town Divided”

December 8, 2010 at 11:06 am Leave a comment

The multimedia piece I selected is “A Town Divided” (TRT 04:45), which is a U.S. news story that was produced by Brent McDonald and Monica Davey on June 18 and it can be found in the New York Times online video library.  The news piece is about an ordinance that was introduced in Fremont, Neb. to discourage illegal immigrant workers from living within the community.  The story explains how citizens recently had petitioned for the city government to hold a special election for Ordinance 5165, which would take place on June 21.  The ordinance would prohibit businesses and landlords from further hiring or renting to illegal immigrants in the city, who were mostly Latinos.  In the story, McDonald and Davey emphasized the social and racial tension that existed between the citizens and the illegal immigrants, while also discussing the political issues that the ordinance brought to the city government’s attention.  In this paper I will discuss the story’s overall content, the quality of the audio and video production, as well as its legal and ethical issues.

The content of the multimedia package is thorough and newsworthy, not only the residents of Fremont, but to the nation.  The story involves a conflict between citizens and noncitizens, which was described as two different relationships by the authors.  On one side, the citizens generally stated how they do not want illegal immigrants in their city because of the threat they cause to their American society.  While the other side of the argument discussed how immigration is up to the federal government and that it is relatively hard to distinguish which Latinos are citizens or illegal immigrants.  “A Town Divided” also used impact to tell a compelling story.  For instance, the piece captures the emotion of angry citizens who wanted the illegal immigrants out of the city, while the story portrayed the distress of Latinos who were being victimized based on their racial identities.

The story uses multiple interviews and other information to tell a narrative that is both conversational and current.  When a news story is conversational, it is implied that the reporter developed a rapport with his or her sources and therefore carried out journalistic integrity.  The subjects of the story, whether they were for or against the ordinance, seemed relaxed and willing to speak on camera about their concerns.  One of the citizens who organized the petition for the ordinance stated; “That seems to be the thread that runs common in these cities, that you’ve got a meat packing plant, you’ve got a problem with the illegal aliens,” (McDonald and Davey 00:10).  This view represented how some citizens were concerned that illegal immigrants would continue to move into their city if they didn’t pass the ordinance and restrict illegal immigration.

But, the notion that people of the victimized group spoke freely and openly about their struggles showed how they believed in the journalist’s objectives.  An illegal immigrant spoke on camera and said, “I’m not a citizen, but I have my rights, too” (00:50).  The former interview was important to the context of the news story, as it provided a human interest opportunity for the audience to understand how the Latinos were discriminated against.  Another example was a man who owned a Mexican grocery store.  He was comfortable enough to read a threat letter he received about hiring illegal immigrants to work (03:24).  This segment of the story exhibited how the journalist earned the man’s trust.  Thus the journalist must have ensured that the story would produce an unbiased account of the city’s problem and that he or she intended to seek the truth.

Although, regarding this piece’s content, the authors neglected to include a related political news story that was a precedent to Fremont’s circumstances.  In journalism, it is known that when a story’s topic or subject has previously appeared in mainstream news that it is common to reference back to that particular event.  For instance, McDonald and Davey could have referenced the illegal immigration laws that Hazleton, Pa. enforced in a similar fashion during 2006.  According to Jan Ting, professor of law at Temple University, Hazleton; like Fremont, established ordinances that held owners of rental properties responsible to fulfill registration and license requirements, prohibited “employment of any ‘unauthorized alien,’” and prohibited landlords from renting to illegal immigrants (Ting 5).  With such similar discriminatory codes against illegal immigrants in both cities, the news piece about Fremont could have included the outcome or success of the Hazleton ordinances’.  Thus, the piece would have stated how the federal court ruled Hazleton’s ordinances unconstitutional, which could have given viewers some background knowledge about federal ruling on immigration policy.

Further, the news story could have mentioned that the ordinance in Fremont was attracting attention from other social organizations and/or interest groups.  According to an article by CNN (“Nebraska city’s controversial immigration rule passes;” 06/22/2010), a group called One Fremont-One Future and the American Civil Liberties Union planned to act against the ordinance, if it passed its special election.  The news story, “A Town Divided,” should have interviewed members of One Fremont-One Future in its package because it could have added another angle to the story.  It would have been interesting for the authors to note in the story how the local organization thought the ordinance could destroy relationships within the community, as reported by CNN.

The story represented an adequate level of quality in regards to its overall audio and video production.  The sound levels remained balanced and sufficient throughout the entire package, so I did not consider audio to be an issue for this news story.  But, the b-roll in the story used too much generic video.  There are a couple cases in the story (02:36, 04:28) where the camera panned across unidentified people in the city, as the reporter stated something referring to illegal immigrants.  Thus, the reporter is risking the chance that he or she is defaming these individuals.  In addition, only the outside of buildings, where illegal immigrants allegedly worked, was shown during cutaways in the story.  For example, when the reporter explained how the beef packing companies check the workers’ paperwork, only a long shot of the company’s building is shown.  It is implied that the camera operator cannot shoot inside the company building because it is on private property and he or she does not have permission.  Regardless, I would still suggest that the authors of the story find more appealing b-roll, such as images of past workers who were being deported by the city.

I think one of the major issues the authors have with the video production of the story is their establishing shot.  The piece opened with a long shot of three citizens just sitting in someone’s backyard.  Moreover, the package began with one of the citizens speaking to a reporter about why the city is experiencing an immigration problem.  So there was not a conventional lead nor was there a voice over by the anchor to initially introduce the story.  It is known, however, in the industry that broadcast stories should begin with an attention-grabbing hook to get the audience to listen to the whole story.  If I could redo the introduction, I think I would make the story’s second sequence—which gives the audience a glimpse of the city—its first sequence.  That way, the viewers are better prepared to comprehend the story’s meaning.

McDonald and Davey researched their story’s topic and presented facts and information in an overall ethical way.  For instance, the authors represented different peoples’ perspectives within the story about Fremont.  They accomplished the former by alternating SOTs between those who opposed the ordinance and those who wanted to see it passed and put into effect.  Therefore, the story is an unbiased account because the authors did not side with either cause.

The use of an array of sources in the story also shows the complexity of the immigration issue and the impact of the issue on the community.  When the authors used sources including an owner of a Mexican business, the citizens of Fremont, illegal aliens, or the mayor of the city; they created a story that is not only credible, but one that also contains due diligence for an audience.  It is a credible or a believable story because the authors filmed key informants, who discussed the conflict or they provided research directly from the source it originally came from.  For example, the mayor is quoted from a speech he made two years earlier about the city’s immigration ordinance and he stated how it needed to follow federal law.  Further, the story realized the public’s need to know accurate information about the immigration issue.  The authors later stated that the Hispanic population made up less than 10 percent of the city’s population (02:34).  The former is an accurate statistic, as it can be confirmed by the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau.  In addition, the authors obtained a key interview, in my opinion, with a “longtime Hispanic resident” of the city, who explained to the audience that she has experienced racial stereotyping in Fremont (02:50).

The story’s overall content, quality of production, and ethical and legal issues enabled it to be a newsworthy and effective story.  “A Town Divided” portrayed the views and interests from a variety of people who were impacted by the immigration policy and possible ordinance.  In addition, the story is a comprehensive preview for the city of Fremont’s special election that was scheduled to take place just three days after the story was produced.  The authors created a multimedia piece that is visually appealing, to a degree, while it effectively provides information for the public about the significance of the ordinance for the people of the city.

Works cited

“Fremont (city) QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau.” State and County QuickFacts. 2000. Web. <http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/31/3117670.html>.

Hornick, By Ed. “Nebraska City’s Controversial Immigration Rule Passes – CNN.” Featured Articles from CNN. 22 June 2010. Web. <http://articles.cnn.com/2010-06-22/politics/fremont.immigration.ballot_1_immigration-policy-ordinance-farmers-branch?_s=PM:POLITICS>.

McDonald, Brent, and Monica Davey. “A Town Divided.” Video Library Home Page – The New York Times. 18 June 2010. Web. <http://video.nytimes.com/video/2010/06/18/us/1247468077117/a-town-divided.html>.

Ting, Jan C. “The Case for Immigration Law Enforcement in the United States and in Hazleton, Pennsylvania.” Widener Law Journal Feb (2008): 1-9. Online.

Entry filed under: Civil Rights. Tags: .